5 ms·

Typically Alzheimer’s diagnoses are given with extreme reluctance, it changes how every person that interacts with that patient will view their condition, progn

Typically Alzheimer’s diagnoses are given with extreme reluctance, it changes how every person that interacts with that patient will view their condition, prognosis and treatment options. I think that has more to do with the extended time frame than the actual ability of family and medical providers to see changes in a patient cognition and abilities.

djohnston 8y ago
i think these early diagnostic techniques are a necessary brick on the road to curing AD. by the time people are showing clinical symptoms the disease has already progressed and has been doing so for decades. treatments that slow progression will be more effective if administered earlier on in the progression.
rincebrain 8y ago
That seems like a problem subject to heavy confirmation bias - e.g. people decide their relative is cognitively impaired and see any transient shortfall as being more evidence, rather than any number of other possible causes. (Not that you can't necessarily see cognitive decline externally earlier than a diagnosis, just that it seems like it'd be hard to make a clinical argument about persistent decline versus several poor nights of sleep, for example.)
vegardx 8y ago
It also triggers a lot of legal implications. In Norway your divorce is automatically approved if your spouse is diagnosed with Alzheimer's.
- tigershark 8y ago
  Seriously? It seems really inhuman to me.
  - trisiak 8y ago
    You mean the fact that divorce needs to be approved...?
    - tyfon 8y ago
      Since a marriage is a legal binding there are procedures for a divorce. You need to live separated for one year to have it approved for one thing. And if you have children under guardianship you are required to attend family counseling or such. I assume that what is refereed to in the upper comment is the waiting period and other requirements. Personally I did not know this was the case with altzheimer even though I am Norwegian.
  - AlexCoventry 8y ago
    In Norway the government takes responsibility for health care, so it's less horrible than it would be in, say, the US.
  - criddell 8y ago
    I feel the opposite. If I was unhappy in my marriage and found out my spouse now also has Alzheimer's, granting a quick exit from a situation that can only get worse seems humane to me. Why force somebody who is suffering to suffer even more?
    - gjm11 8y ago
      Making it easier to divorce your spouse if they get Alzheimer's is more humane for spouses of Alzheimer's victims (who get to escape that unpleasant situation more easily) and more inhumane for Alzheimer's victims themselves (who are more likely to find themselves abandoned at a time when they are increasingly unable to cope on their own).
      - barrow-rider 8y ago
        > who are more likely to find themselves abandoned at a time when they are increasingly unable to cope on their own That often happens rapidly, and in many cases putting the Alzheimer's patient in full-time care is the only option -- even with a caring, involved spouse. I watched my grandfather go from a slightly forgetful goof to confused, violent, and impossible to manage in <3 years. My grandmother, not doing so well herself, struggled to keep up but after a couple years putting grandpa in a facility was the only real tenable option.
        max76 8y ago
        Yes, Alzheimer's patients will eventually need to be placed in a facility.
        criddell 8y ago
        If I were diagnosed, I would make plans to ensure that doesn't happen with me.
        bloak 8y ago
        Not necessarily. They might die of other causes first. There are several things in this discussion that make not much sense to me (a non-Norwegian): * How would a divorce court refer to a (confidential) medical diagnosis? In some countries, at least, even a criminal court cannot easily access such things. * Why would the law refer to a diagnosis of a particular disease (when the patient might still be healthy) rather than refer to actual cognitive impairment? * What's the hurry? Can't you get a divorce fairly quickly just by moving out and filling in some forms? * One of the major legal implications of divorce is that you don't automatically inherit or get insurance pay-outs. Not the most obvious thing to want when your spouse has a terminal illness, though in some cases you know there's no money involved. Even if you're named in the will there may be bad tax implications if you're not married to the person you're inheriting from. * Someone mentioned children, but divorce doesn't have to relate directly to children: courts have to deal with the children of unmarried couples, and they have to deal with the children of couples that are separated but still married, so I'd expect a court to worry about the relationships and the welfare of the children and not to care very much whether the parents/guardians are officially married or not. I would guess that these are all areas of law in which there are a lot of differences between jurisdictions.
  - 14 8y ago
    Well, as inhumane as it seems I can promise you no one wishes Alzheimer's on anyone and when the person gets it they are no longer the person you knew. In a sense, the disease has killed off their mind and the person you knew. Spiritual death. But the body lives on. The other thing with this disease is the rate at which it can come on. Early on set Alzheimer's can come on so quickly that everyone is caught off guard. If you were in your 40's married to someone in their 50's who suddenly needed full time care, as harsh as it sounds I would not judge that person for leaving the marriage. In my personal opinion the person with advanced Alzheimer's would have little insight to what exactly is going on around them, like their spouse is no longer with them, and divorcing them would not even register. I more picture these divorces happening after the person is well on their way and really lack the mental capacity to understand or worry about it. It would be a little harsher if the machine could tell you 6 years before you got the disease and your partner left you but again I would not judge.
  - sjg007 8y ago
    Well maybe.. forcing someone to stay married may also be considered inhumane. It also probably means the spouse with Alzheimer legally cannot consent to a divorce as well.
- dsfyu404ed 8y ago
  Seems like a great incentive to pay off a doctor to diagnose someone so you can lose less money, get the kids, have another bargaining chip in a messy divorce, etc, etc. Edit: Pointing out flaws/possible exploits in a system is not the same thing as endorsing their use.
  - WrtCdEvrydy 8y ago
    Doesn't mean you don't have to pay alimony.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
  - SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
    In that case the same could be done with sexual assault or abuse allegations. There's no end to possible duplicity, this doesn't really extend it, especially as Alzheimer's is going to be a super specific diagnosis. What is the Venn diagram of people who are fighting over kids and also suffering from Alzheimer's?
- aaaaaaaaaab 8y ago
  Approved? Why is an approval even needed? They can force people to stay married in Norway by not approving a divorce?
  - vegardx 8y ago
    Unless you want to involve a judge and a legal process I imagine you usually need two signatures, at the very least. In Norway there are other requirements as well.
- pvaldes 8y ago
  And this people can be also sort of 'legally sequestered' by the government. I know a case and is horrifying to see it.
  - pvaldes 8y ago
    EDIT -> legally kidnapped is the correct word

djohnston 8y ago

i think these early diagnostic techniques are a necessary brick on the road to curing AD. by the time people are showing clinical symptoms the disease has already progressed and has been doing so for decades. treatments that slow progression will be more effective if administered earlier on in the progression.

rincebrain 8y ago

That seems like a problem subject to heavy confirmation bias - e.g. people decide their relative is cognitively impaired and see any transient shortfall as being more evidence, rather than any number of other possible causes. (Not that you can't necessarily see cognitive decline externally earlier than a diagnosis, just that it seems like it'd be hard to make a clinical argument about persistent decline versus several poor nights of sleep, for example.)

vegardx 8y ago

It also triggers a lot of legal implications. In Norway your divorce is automatically approved if your spouse is diagnosed with Alzheimer's.

tigershark 8y ago
Seriously? It seems really inhuman to me.
- trisiak 8y ago
  You mean the fact that divorce needs to be approved...?
  - tyfon 8y ago
    Since a marriage is a legal binding there are procedures for a divorce. You need to live separated for one year to have it approved for one thing. And if you have children under guardianship you are required to attend family counseling or such. I assume that what is refereed to in the upper comment is the waiting period and other requirements. Personally I did not know this was the case with altzheimer even though I am Norwegian.
- AlexCoventry 8y ago
  In Norway the government takes responsibility for health care, so it's less horrible than it would be in, say, the US.
- criddell 8y ago
  I feel the opposite. If I was unhappy in my marriage and found out my spouse now also has Alzheimer's, granting a quick exit from a situation that can only get worse seems humane to me. Why force somebody who is suffering to suffer even more?
  - gjm11 8y ago
    Making it easier to divorce your spouse if they get Alzheimer's is more humane for spouses of Alzheimer's victims (who get to escape that unpleasant situation more easily) and more inhumane for Alzheimer's victims themselves (who are more likely to find themselves abandoned at a time when they are increasingly unable to cope on their own).
    - barrow-rider 8y ago
      > who are more likely to find themselves abandoned at a time when they are increasingly unable to cope on their own That often happens rapidly, and in many cases putting the Alzheimer's patient in full-time care is the only option -- even with a caring, involved spouse. I watched my grandfather go from a slightly forgetful goof to confused, violent, and impossible to manage in <3 years. My grandmother, not doing so well herself, struggled to keep up but after a couple years putting grandpa in a facility was the only real tenable option.
      - max76 8y ago
        Yes, Alzheimer's patients will eventually need to be placed in a facility.
        criddell 8y ago
        If I were diagnosed, I would make plans to ensure that doesn't happen with me.
        bloak 8y ago
        Not necessarily. They might die of other causes first. There are several things in this discussion that make not much sense to me (a non-Norwegian): * How would a divorce court refer to a (confidential) medical diagnosis? In some countries, at least, even a criminal court cannot easily access such things. * Why would the law refer to a diagnosis of a particular disease (when the patient might still be healthy) rather than refer to actual cognitive impairment? * What's the hurry? Can't you get a divorce fairly quickly just by moving out and filling in some forms? * One of the major legal implications of divorce is that you don't automatically inherit or get insurance pay-outs. Not the most obvious thing to want when your spouse has a terminal illness, though in some cases you know there's no money involved. Even if you're named in the will there may be bad tax implications if you're not married to the person you're inheriting from. * Someone mentioned children, but divorce doesn't have to relate directly to children: courts have to deal with the children of unmarried couples, and they have to deal with the children of couples that are separated but still married, so I'd expect a court to worry about the relationships and the welfare of the children and not to care very much whether the parents/guardians are officially married or not. I would guess that these are all areas of law in which there are a lot of differences between jurisdictions.
- 14 8y ago
  Well, as inhumane as it seems I can promise you no one wishes Alzheimer's on anyone and when the person gets it they are no longer the person you knew. In a sense, the disease has killed off their mind and the person you knew. Spiritual death. But the body lives on. The other thing with this disease is the rate at which it can come on. Early on set Alzheimer's can come on so quickly that everyone is caught off guard. If you were in your 40's married to someone in their 50's who suddenly needed full time care, as harsh as it sounds I would not judge that person for leaving the marriage. In my personal opinion the person with advanced Alzheimer's would have little insight to what exactly is going on around them, like their spouse is no longer with them, and divorcing them would not even register. I more picture these divorces happening after the person is well on their way and really lack the mental capacity to understand or worry about it. It would be a little harsher if the machine could tell you 6 years before you got the disease and your partner left you but again I would not judge.
- sjg007 8y ago
  Well maybe.. forcing someone to stay married may also be considered inhumane. It also probably means the spouse with Alzheimer legally cannot consent to a divorce as well.
dsfyu404ed 8y ago
Seems like a great incentive to pay off a doctor to diagnose someone so you can lose less money, get the kids, have another bargaining chip in a messy divorce, etc, etc. Edit: Pointing out flaws/possible exploits in a system is not the same thing as endorsing their use.
- WrtCdEvrydy 8y ago
  Doesn't mean you don't have to pay alimony.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
  In that case the same could be done with sexual assault or abuse allegations. There's no end to possible duplicity, this doesn't really extend it, especially as Alzheimer's is going to be a super specific diagnosis. What is the Venn diagram of people who are fighting over kids and also suffering from Alzheimer's?
aaaaaaaaaab 8y ago
Approved? Why is an approval even needed? They can force people to stay married in Norway by not approving a divorce?
- vegardx 8y ago
  Unless you want to involve a judge and a legal process I imagine you usually need two signatures, at the very least. In Norway there are other requirements as well.
pvaldes 8y ago
And this people can be also sort of 'legally sequestered' by the government. I know a case and is horrifying to see it.
- pvaldes 8y ago
  EDIT -> legally kidnapped is the correct word