Can seizures cause a change in mood?

Welcome to the Coping With Epilepsy Forums

Welcome to the Coping With Epilepsy forums - a peer support community for folks dealing (directly or indirectly) with seizure disorders. You can visit the forum page to see the list of forum nodes (categories/rooms) for topics.

Please have a look around and if you like what you see, please consider registering an account and joining the discussions. When you register an account and log in, you may enjoy additional benefits including no ads, access to members only (ie. private) forum nodes and more. Registering an account is free - you have nothing to lose!

My cousin has had ECT to treat depression. But it really wipes out his memory, and it may or may not have left him vulnerable to having seizures in other situations -- he's had at least one non-ECT seizure since starting treatment.

Exactly, ECT is a drastic way to deal with a mental health issue.
 
what i was attempting to do by suggesting that the wiki entry on ECT be read was point out that historically it owes it's origins to the observation that indeed there is a link between seizure and mood. It was at one point observed that some patients suffering from chronic depression spontaneously recovered after major episodes. So it could go either way really. Suffering from epileptic seizures could definitely cause one to experience depression as a result but it could also absolutely go the other direction.

This was not an attempt to Justify ECT as a treatment, although a bit of research seems to suggest that the treatment is far more humane than it once was. Is it a reasonable treatment for chronic epilepsy? I have no opinion, I am not a neurologist. if the decision were up to me (and it isn't) I would say that such a decision would need to be based upon a balance between how the patients of such treatments feel about their experiences with it and how objectively effective it can be viewed to have been in a collection of specific cases. Since I don't believe that the ends justify the means (ever) I would be forced to conclude objective analysis alone would be a poor measure of success in the analysis of how effective such a treatment can be considered to be.
 
Last edited:
what i was attempting to do by suggesting that the wiki entry on ECT be read was point out that historically it owes it's origins to the observation that indeed there is a link between seizure and mood. It was at one point observed that some patients suffering from chronic depression spontaneously recovered after major episodes. So it could go either way really. Suffering from epileptic seizures could definitely cause one to experience depression as a result but it could also absolutely go the other direction.

This was not an attempt to Justify ECT as a treatment, although a bit of research seems to suggest that the treatment is far more humane than it once was. Is it a reasonable treatment for chronic epilepsy? I have no opinion, I am not a neurologist. if the decision were up to me (and it isn't) I would say that such a decision would need to be based upon a balance between how the patients of such treatments feel about their experiences with it and how objectively effective it can be viewed to have been in a collection of specific cases. Since I don't believe that the ends justify the means (ever) I would be forced to conclude objective analysis alone would be a poor measure of success in the analysis of how effective such a treatment can be considered to be.

ECT is indirectly, analogous to being, a medical variation of the electric chair. No person, no matter how 'mentally imbalanced', deserves that, as a form of medical treatment.
 
To be fair, ECT definitely helps my cousin in ways that medication did not. But I still wonder about the ultimate cost and risks to his long-term health.
 
ECT is indirectly, analogous to being, a medical variation of the electric chair. No person, no matter how 'mentally imbalanced', deserves that, as a form of medical treatment.

No personal offence intended (truley) but I think you have watched "one flew over the coo coo's nest" one too many times. Contemporary ECT is not some archaic form of Frankenstein-like punishment, it's extremely regulated and considered a last resort for many who cope with an endless and insurmountable depressive state. This is 2012, not 1950. I encourage you to read about the contemporary applications of it in depression as a last resort and also to consider how it will continue to evolve (as all medical technologies have) int what will eventually be a precision tool.

It will eventually become totally obsolete, of course but consider how many fields have found application for electrical stimulation of the brain and consider that much of it began with ECT.

So, if by "indirectly analogous" you mean instead mean "in no direct way analogous at all"..then it's totally true. Otherwise it's just not and I am not saying that as an asault on your private right to believe what you like I am simply saying that it's not true.

As Nakamova said, there are costs to be weighed and I imagine these are largely to be assessed on a patient to patient basis, for some the cost may be too high and I don;t doubt that for others the procedure might be risky in ways that would be impossible to predict without superhuman foreknowledge of every last biological quirk that a patient might have, but this is no less a risk for any treatment which medical science has devised throughout history, it's far from being the exclusive property of Electroconvulsive therapy. A doctor is a doctor at the end of the day , that is a human being who seeks to understand the human condition and it's aliments which increasing accuracy for the purpose of healing and improving the quality of human life they aren't and shouldn't be expected to be prescient.

it's all become a bit of a tangent now, I merely intended to point out that there is a president for a connection between mood and epilepsy, that's all. I admit however ...I do love to debate :)
 
Last edited:
Yes Epileptic fits do effect your mood, as does the medication you take to treat it.

It is on that basis that Drs still prescribe ECT to depressed patients.
Giving them a ‘Fit’ appears to lift their mood.

However this is done in a controlled way under anaesthetic.
So the negative effects are removed.
They usually have a course of treatments. Probably twice a week for up to 6 weeks.

ECT does not help Epilepsy
 
No personal offence intended (truley) but I think you have watched "one flew over the coo coo's nest" one too many times. Contemporary ECT is not some archaic form of Frankenstein-like punishment, it's extremely regulated and considered a last resort for many who cope with an endless and insurmountable depressive state. This is 2012, not 1950. I encourage you to read about the contemporary applications of it in depression as a last resort and also to consider how it will continue to evolve (as all medical technologies have) int what will eventually be a precision tool.

It will eventually become totally obsolete, of course but consider how many fields have found application for electrical stimulation of the brain and consider that much of it began with ECT.

So, if by "indirectly analogous" you mean instead mean "in no direct way analogous at all"..then it's totally true. Otherwise it's just not and I am not saying that as an assault on your private right to believe what you like I am simply saying that it's not true.

As Nakamova said, there are costs to be weighed and I imagine these are largely to be assessed on a patient to patient basis, for some the cost may be too high and I don;t doubt that for others the procedure might be risky in ways that would be impossible to predict without superhuman foreknowledge of every last biological quirk that a patient might have, but this is no less a risk for any treatment which medical science has devised throughout history, it's far from being the exclusive property of Electroconvulsive therapy. A doctor is a doctor at the end of the day , that is a human being who seeks to understand the human condition and it's aliments which increasing accuracy for the purpose of healing and improving the quality of human life they aren't and shouldn't be expected to be prescient.

it's all become a bit of a tangent now, I merely intended to point out that there is a president for a connection between mood and epilepsy, that's all. I admit however ...I do love to debate :)

While I know Jack Nicholson starred in 'One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest', I have never watched the movie. The application of of electricity however minute and monitored, as a form of therapy in health care, is still barbaric. I know this is 2012, not 1950. While ECT may be the stepping stone for other medical advances, it is still barbaric.

When I said 'indirectly analogous', I meant that similar to the electric chair, but that the application of electricity is at a far different level, and a far different purpose. Also, I know about the cost/benefit dilemma. But I think the psychological cost of ECT is too great, to justify its' use as a form of therapy.
 
Yes Epileptic fits do effect your mood, as does the medication you take to treat it.

It is on that basis that Drs still prescribe ECT to depressed patients.
Giving them a ‘Fit’ appears to lift their mood.

However this is done in a controlled way under anaesthetic.
So the negative effects are removed.
They usually have a course of treatments. Probably twice a week for up to 6 weeks.

ECT does not help Epilepsy

this is precisely what i was referring to.



While I know Jack Nicholson starred in 'One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest', I have never watched the movie. The application of of electricity however minute and monitored, as a form of therapy in health care, is still barbaric. I know this is 2012, not 1950. While ECT may be the stepping stone for other medical advances, it is still barbaric.

When I said 'indirectly analogous', I meant that similar to the electric chair, but that the application of electricity is at a far different level, and a far different purpose. Also, I know about the cost/benefit dilemma. But I think the psychological cost of ECT is too great, to justify its' use as a form of therapy.

Car, have you had or do you know anyone who was unjustly prescribed ECT?
Are you a medical professional with the credentials to back up such an assertion? You are saying bar none IT IS barbaric and stating it as a fact and I must challenge that since it's been established that the treatment has been beneficial for many people.

For the record I don't like the idea of ECT but it's my opinion and i state that that's all it is. I can clearly recognize that it's been effective and helpful for a lot of people. I would think that in the worst case scenario one would be forced to conclude that it's a controversial treatment. I would like to know where specifically you make the leap from this controversy into "Barbarism"?
 
Back
Top Bottom