Jump to content

New OCD Book Club - May - Break free from OCD


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 113
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

A good book GBG is "Overcoming Obsessive Thoughts - How To Gain Control Of Your OCD"  by Christine Purdon and David Clark. 

I would suggest this one for July. I bought it from OCD-UK and it deals nicely with the thoughts and consequential mental compulsions, and I would love to hear what others think of this book. 

Edited by taurean
Link to comment

It's a good feature took me a while to work it out. 

Incidentally thanks Ashley for making the emoticons more accessible (e.g.put in colon and sleep and the options pop up). 

Link to comment
30 minutes ago, gingerbreadgirl said:

I volunteer @snowbear and @Gemma7for this - they could write a cracking book on cognitive stuff! up for it guys? 

:lol: That's really nice of you but I'm leaving it to the professionals! 

I don't know how to use the tagging feature, is it on mobiles? :blush:

Link to comment

I haven't read Break free from OCD again, sorry been busy. But i have read it loads and dip into it all the time. I agree with pretty much everything that has been said (boring I know:D) but wanted to comment on the discussion on the theory A/B stuff. 

I think that people are a little confused about what it is and what it's purpose is (which you could argue is a problem with the book). It is not about gaining cognitive insight, it is not a cognitive exercise. It is about forming two explanations for what is happening to someone. One explanation has their problem being one of danger (theory A) the other a problem of worry (theory B), with the therapist and sufferer agreeing that both can't be true. All the evidence and analysis is without judgment, at this point either theory might be true. In fact, no one says which theory is true. It's just two explanations that are mutually agreed. The learning and change occurs when someone tries living according to theory B as part of a behaviour experiment. They look at what happened and review which theory is the most likely explanation for their problems. 

In order to learn the most from this you have to gain the knowledge that what you fear doesn't happen, you cope, your anxiety/distress diminishs if you don't do compulsions. It's about laying out the path to change and you deciding which path is right for you. 

Link to comment

I agree with Gemma let's leave the writing to the professionals who have the accessibility to publishers and likely relevant insurance. 

We do a great job here helping people under the umbrella of OCD-UK and based on our personal experience - and the combination of the OCD-UK charity, therapists self-help and help from fellow sufferers is extremely powerful. 

Link to comment
40 minutes ago, Gemma7 said:

That's really nice of you but I'm leaving it to the professionals! 

You've just helped rewrite an entire OCD website!!!  Although you may all be very busy and/or just not want to... but...

for what it's worth I think between you three you have enough writing and technical skills to put something together. Of course would have to involve a fourth author, a medical professional but there is no bigger experts in this aspect of the condition that people that's struggled through it. 

1 hour ago, gingerbreadgirl said:

I volunteer @snowbear and @Gemma7for this - they could write a cracking book on cognitive stuff! up for it guys? 

 

Link to comment
28 minutes ago, Gemma7 said:

I haven't read Break free from OCD again, sorry been busy. But i have read it loads and dip into it all the time. I agree with pretty much everything that has been said (boring I know:D) but wanted to comment on the discussion on the theory A/B stuff. 

I think that people are a little confused about what it is and what it's purpose is (which you could argue is a problem with the book). It is not about gaining cognitive insight, it is not a cognitive exercise. It is about forming two explanations for what is happening to someone. One explanation has their problem being one of danger (theory A) the other a problem of worry (theory B), with the therapist and sufferer agreeing that both can't be true. All the evidence and analysis is without judgment, at this point either theory might be true. In fact, no one says which theory is true. It's just two explanations that are mutually agreed. The learning and change occurs when someone tries living according to theory B as part of a behaviour experiment. They look at what happened and review which theory is the most likely explanation for their problems. 

In order to learn the most from this you have to gain the knowledge that what you fear doesn't happen, you cope, your anxiety/distress diminishs if you don't do compulsions. It's about laying out the path to change and you deciding which path is right for you. 

i agree that it is used as a behavioural tool but I'm not sure I agree it isn't intended as a cognitive tool as well.  Or else why the need to build evidence prior to the behavioural experiments?

Link to comment

In my humble opinion the behavioural experiment will not work, any more than ERP will, unless the sufferer understands how OCD works first of all. 

This element is for me vital for anyone in getting on top of their OCD. Why?  Because otherwise why shouldn't they believe what their brain is telling them is true? 

I have had a lot of private CBT therapy, and read a lot of self-help books - plus been active on the forums for 5 or 6 years. 

If I were myself wanting to write a book - which I am not - the ethos of how OCD works would definitely take up the first part of such a book.

Link to comment
23 minutes ago, gingerbreadgirl said:

i agree that it is used as a behavioural tool but I'm not sure I agree it isn't intended as a cognitive tool as well.  Or else why the need to build evidence prior to the behavioural experiments?

What I mean is it's not about thinking about things differently, not at that point. It's neither a behavioural nor cognitive tool, it's a CBT tool, the two are linked. 

Link to comment
4 hours ago, taurean said:

A good book GBG is "Overcoming Obsessive Thoughts - How To Gain Control Of Your OCD"  by Christine Purdon and David Clark.

Sorry I missed this post earlier - thanks for this Roy I may give it a go.  I think this is one of the few I haven't read!

Link to comment
4 hours ago, Gemma7 said:

One explanation has their problem being one of danger (theory A) the other a problem of worry (theory B)

One issue I have with this is that - surely - they could both be true, in theory.  I don't think I go along with this assertion that they can't both be true. I had that niggling concern when I read it the first time.  Just because you are excessively worried about something doesn't necessarily preclude the possibility of there also being a danger.

Link to comment
25 minutes ago, gingerbreadgirl said:

One issue I have with this is that - surely - they could both be true, in theory.  I don't think I go along with this assertion that they can't both be true. I had that niggling concern when I read it the first time.  Just because you are excessively worried about something doesn't necessarily preclude the possibility of there also being a danger.

Maybe I've written it poorly but there can't be dangers all around as well as you're worried there are dangers all around. Either there are dangers or there aren't. They can't both be true. 

What you reference is a specific problem. Yes you could be both worried about a lion being in your room and there be a lion in your room. But if you go around looking for lions then it is a problem of worry. 

Link to comment
30 minutes ago, gingerbreadgirl said:

One issue I have with this is that - surely - they could both be true, in theory.  I don't think I go along with this assertion that they can't both be true. I had that niggling concern when I read it the first time.  Just because you are excessively worried about something doesn't necessarily preclude the possibility of there also being a danger.

I think the concept is theory A the OCD belief is true, theory B is that we are really worried that the OCD belief is true. 

The OCD core belief carries the behavioural response of fear threat or revulsion.

Theory B is saying that we can review the evidence and see our problem rather as a fear that the OCD core belief is true. 

By accepting that we are seeing the OCD for what it is - a falsehood or exaggeration of nil or minimum threat, or an unnecessary revulsion reaction - we take the fear /threat out of it. 

Edited by taurean
Link to comment
10 minutes ago, Gemma7 said:

Maybe I've written it poorly but there can't be dangers all around as well as you're worried there are dangers all around. Either there are dangers or there aren't. They can't both be true.

OK so am I right in thinking it is something like "Theory A is that the primary problem is one of danger" and "Theory B is that the primary problem is one of worry" and that they can't both be true?

11 minutes ago, Gemma7 said:

 you could be both worried about a lion being in your room and there be a lion in your room.

sorry I know this is a good and serious point but I can't help smile at the image of me frantically filling in theoryA/B charts while a lion is in my room :D

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...