Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Mon, 13 Sep 1999 00:27:04 -0400 |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="us-ascii" |
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
>I debated ignoring this post but decided I couldn't just let this one
>go. I'm not exactly certain which part of this one has me more furious:
>the implications about poverty; equation of prozac and zoloft with pot;
>or that somehow, a person acting responsibly to help themselves and
>their situation through the responsible use of an antidepressant would
>otherwise be prone to starve their child to death.
I'm not sure where you got *any* of that from what I said.
My point *is* were I a mother who's baby had starved to death, and
obviously unable to afford anti depressants, I could certainly see getting
marijuana (there are many ways to get drugs without $) as a substitute. In
another socioeconomic group, if a mother had inadvertantly starved her
baby, it could easily lead to a depression which she would receive an
antidepressant for help with combatting. Which no one (rightfully so!)
would say a word about.
Her drug charge was LONG after her child died. Which is what led to *my*
assumption she was likely self mecicating (consciously or no) her
depression with marijuana, something *very common* amongst marijuana users.
I meant *no* disparagement to those on anti-depressants, rather I was
pointing out that if she were in another socio-economic group I doubt she'd
be on pot, I bet she would be on anti-depressants!
-wendey (studying LC in Montreal)
***********************************************
The LACTNET mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's LSMTP(TM)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html
|
|
|