Borderline Personality Disorder Case Study

 

 

 

S.is a 48-year-old divorced woman with one adult daughter and three grandchildren. She is currently working as an LPN part-time in a nursing home and works at a convenience store one or two days per week. She has had many jobs over the last 22 years, usually changing every one or two years to a new job. S notes that she has been called less often to work in the convenience store and worries that they don’t like her anymore. She reports being written up several times for arguing with customers. She also reports that she liked her supervisor at; first; she says, “Now I hate her; she’s trying to get me fired.” S. reports that she has tried to get full-time jobs five times in the last four years was hired for three but only lasted one or two weeks at each one.

S. reports that she is currently not talking to her daughter because “she is mean to me and she needs to apologize, or I won’t talk to her again.” She is upset that she hasn’t seen her three small grandchildren in about a year. She sends them presents and cards frequently that say “I still love you! Grandma” but hasn’t called them since she stopped talking to her daughter. She is considering reporting to the county that her daughter is keeping her grandchildren from her.

S. is very unhappy that she isn’t in a relationship. She was abused by her ex-husband and had a pattern of meeting and dating men who eventually abused her. She states that her last relationship was very good; the man was not abusive, and “I loved him very much.” The relationship ended for reasons that S. doesn’t understand. However, she does report many arguments that ended in “scenes,” such as her throwing chairs, stomping out of the house, making crank phone calls to his family, and calling the police with false reports. But S. also reports that she “couldn’t have loved him more, and I showed it.” She gives examples of going to her boyfriend’s place of work with flowers, buying him expensive presents, surprising him with tickets to Mexico at the last minute – she was very upset that he wasn’t willing to drop everything and go with her. S. reports asking him why he didn’t love her and what she was doing wrong regularly. When the boyfriend asked to break up, S. reported sitting outside his house for weeks, crying; she called his mother, called his boss, and called and texted him until he filed a restraining order. This occurred about four months ago.

S. admitted herself to the mental health unit when she felt suicidal. She reports that she had stopped her psychotherapy three months ago and stopped going to DBT. She also stopped her anti-depressant at that time, as she felt it wasn’t working, and missed her last two psychiatrist appointment

 

 

Question—-

How would you use therapeutic communication and principles of cognitive behavioral therapy with the client?
Describe your assessment process. What are some likely co-morbid conditions? List one nursing diagnosis and an appropriate nursing intervention.
What interdisciplinary referrals might be appropriate?

 

Sample Solution

The model that handles the limitation of free speech best would be the German legal system. This is based on Germany’s provisions against genocide, hate speech, and the expansion of false news. Particularly, their history in relation to genocides such as the Holocaust has developed strict limitations for the purposes of regulating hate speech to prevent genocides from recurring. A provision in which effectively outlines Germany’s legal severity would be section 130 subsection 4 of Germany’s Criminal Code, which prevents persons from violating the dignity of the victims (German Criminal Code, 1998). In particular, the subsection outlines that persons who glorify or justify National Socialist rule of arbitrary force are liable to imprisonment; the section is directed towards persons who endorse Nazi ideologies, persons who deny genocides such as the Holocaust, and those who praise and defend Nazi practices (German Criminal Code, 1998). This provision exemplifies the need to regulate freedom of speech, particularly hate speech, considering the fact that Holocaust denial and further recommendations for genocide have the ability to develop a prominent profile. Essentially, this has proven to be evident during the 1980s in Germany; prior to the establishment of these regulations, far-right political parties “began to win local, regional, and even national-level electoral contests” following the second world war (Bleich, 2011). Overall, the impact of these statements has proven to end in violence towards minorities as well as genocide. For instance, ideologies inciting hatred towards the Jews began to thrive as they were constantly exposed by prominent political figures during this time; Hitler may be the most well-known example of this, as he came into power from public support for spreading hatred against Jews. Eventually, the advancement of hate speech resulted in the Holocaust. In this way, “bad history” in the form of hate speech and Holocaust denial has proven to serve racist or neo-Nazi propaganda, in which “fans the flames of racial distrust and hatred” (Bleich, 2011). As a result, Germany has enacted strict laws in order to prevent the perpetual cycle of genocide and racism within their country.

This question has been answered.

Get Answer