# data[].attributes.body
Both films provide profound insights into the complexity of treating brain disorders, highlighting both the potential and ethical dilemmas linked with medical interventions. Both films feature characters undergoing innovative therapies, emphasising how medical advances may dramatically affect a person's life. However, they also underscore the limitations of these treatments and the ethical questions that arise when weighing the trade-off between quality of life and symptom alleviation.

John Nash's use of antipsychotic medications in A Beautiful Mind (2001) presents significant ethical issues, especially with regard to informed consent and patient autonomy. Nash is initially given medication without fully comprehending its long-term implications, emphasising the tension between symptom relief and potential harm from the treatment. This scenario is exacerbated by Nash's emotional blunting and cognitive side effects, which make it difficult for him to establish personal relationships and function well in his daily life. Ultimately, Nash chooses to discontinue the medication, raising the dilemma of whether it is better to live with the symptoms of schizophrenia than to suffer the devastating side effects of treatment. This conundrum exemplifies the moral challenge that many individuals with mental illnesses encounter: is the illness sometimes worse than the treatment?

Similarly, Awakenings (1990) delves into the ethical concerns of utilising L-DOPA to treat individuals with encephalitis lethargica. The drug's early effects seem remarkable, as patients regain their physical and cognitive functions after emerging from a vegetative condition. However, the drug's effectiveness fade over time, and patients develop significant side effects such as dyskinesia, involuntary movements, and motor oscillations. In the end, these adverse effects lower the patients' quality of life and bring up the moral dilemma of whether the short-term respite offered by L-DOPA is worth the subsequent decline. The film asks viewers whether it is morally appropriate to subject vulnerable people to experimental treatments when the long-term repercussions could exacerbate their condition.

The social repercussions of treating mental disorders are also highlighted in both films. The pharmacological side effects in both cause social isolation and emotional suffering for the patients and their family. The physical and emotional costs of these treatments can exacerbate the stigma and discrimination already experienced by those with mental health or neurological disorders. Medical interventions provide brief hope but frequently result in long-term harm, implying that the solution may be worse than the sickness in some circumstances.

In conclusion, both A Beautiful Mind (2001) and Awakenings (1990) provide valuable insights into the ethical and emotional complexities of treating brain disorders. The films explore essential issues such as the balance between symptom relief and quality of life, the ethics of experimental treatments, and the significance of patient autonomy and informed consent. While medical advancements might provide hope, these films warn us that therapies may have unforeseen consequences, causing more harm than good. The anecdotes prompt us to question the ethics of medical interventions and whether pursuing short-term alleviation is always worth the potential long-term consequences to a patient's well-being.

# data[].attributes.body
A Beautiful Mind. (2001). Directed by Howard, R. [Film]. United States of America: Universal Pictures.

Awakenings. (1990). Directed by Marshall, P. [Film]. United States of America: Columbia Pictures.

Chen, J.J. (2017). Treatment of psychotic symptoms in patients with Parkinson disease. Mental Health Clinician, 7(6), pp.262–270. doi:https://doi.org/10.9740/mhc.2017.11.262.

Freitas, M.E., Hess, C.W. and Fox, S.H. (2017). Motor Complications of Dopaminergic Medications in Parkinson’s Disease. Seminars in neurology, [online] 37(2), pp.147–157. doi:https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0037-1602423.

Kart, A., Özdel, K. and Türkçapar, H. (2021). Cognitive behavioural therapy for schizophrenia. Archives of Neuropsychiatry, [online] 58(1). doi:https://doi.org/10.29399/npa.27418.

McKillip, K.M., Lott, A.D. and Swetz, K.M. (2019). Respecting Autonomy and Promoting the Patient’s Good in the Setting of Serious Terminal and Concurrent Mental Illness. The Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine, [online] 92(4), p.597. Available at: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6913820/.

Mosolov, S.N. and Yaltonskaya, P.A. (2022). Primary and secondary negative symptoms in schizophrenia. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 12(766692). doi:https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.766692.

Pandey, S. and Srivanitchapoom, P. (2017). Levodopa-induced Dyskinesia: Clinical Features, Pathophysiology, and Medical Management. Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology, [online] 20(3), pp.190–198. doi:https://doi.org/10.4103/aian.AIAN_239_17.

Patel, K.R., Cherian, J., Gohil, K. and Atkinson, D. (2014). Schizophrenia: Overview and Treatment Options. Pharmacy and Therapeutics, [online] 39(9), p.638. Available at: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4159061/.

Stroup, T.S. and Gray, N. (2018). Management of common adverse effects of antipsychotic medications. World Psychiatry, 17(3), pp.341–356. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20567.

# data[].attributes.body
Case Study 1: doesn’t mention other drugs like chlorpromazine or other antipsychotics

Case Study 2: could potentially expand a bit more

Haven't checked word count

# data[].attributes.body
Based on Dr. Oliver Sacks' work with patients suffering from encephalitis lethargica, Awakenings (1990) offers a compelling case study of the usage of L-DOPA, a drug mainly prescribed for Parkinson's disease. The film depicts Dr. Sayer treating patients who have been in a vegetative state for decades. When these patients are given L-DOPA, they awaken from their comatose states and regain motor and cognitive functions. The initial effects are miraculous, with patients regaining the ability to speak, move, and interact with their surroundings. However, as time progresses, the drug's effects begin to wear off, leading to the return of their symptoms. The film explores how the side effects of L-DOPA, such as dyskinesia and motor fluctuations, gradually worsen the patients’ quality of life (Freitas, Hess and Fox, 2017). The progression of these complications illustrates the limitations of the drug, forcing both patients and the medical professionals to confront the question of whether the temporary relief provided by L-DOPA is worth the inevitable decline that follows. This raises the ethical dilemma of whether it is better to experience temporary improvement only to face a worsening condition or to avoid treatment altogether.

The most common adverse effect of L-DOPA use is dyskinesia, which results in jerky, involuntary movements. Patients with Parkinson's disease often experience this consequence as a result of long-term medication use (Pandey and Srivanitchapoom, 2017). The patient's regression is depicted in the film; after being initially returned to functional independence, they start to lose motor control once more. This struggle is personified by Leonard Lowe in Awakenings (1990), who initially celebrates his newfound mobility, only to be confronted with uncontrollable motions and the recurrence of his prior condition. His emotional turmoil raises a central ethical question in the film: is it preferable to have short-term respite only to revert to a worse state or to have completely avoided the therapy and so spared the ensuing suffering?

Along with dyskinesia, individuals may also experience motor fluctuations, which cause their symptoms to drastically change from day to day (Freitas, Hess and Fox, 2017). As their bodies develop tolerance to the drug, individuals lose the benefits they previously enjoyed. The unpredictable nature of L-DOPA treatment, combined with its decreased efficacy over time, provides a grim picture of medical development. The film depicts how the recurrence of debilitating symptoms can outweigh momentary improvements, implying that medical therapies, despite their initial promise, can eventually harm a patient's quality of life

Furthermore, Awakenings (1990) emphasises the emotional cost of the treatment. Patients who experience the awakening effect find the transition from immobility to sudden agency overwhelming. They are returned to a world that they no longer completely understand, and their ties with family and society deteriorate. In this sense, L-DOPA's transforming effect presents a paradox, as patients go through the pain of re-engaging with the world, only to have their condition return. The ethical question of whether the fleeting benefits of the treatment justify the potential harm it causes is one of the central themes of Awakenings, highlighting how medical interventions, while promising, sometimes have unintended consequences that are worse than the disease itself

# data[].attributes.body
The treatment of neurological and psychiatric disorders poses significant ethical and medical challenges. While drugs can greatly relieve symptoms, they frequently have serious side effects that cause patients to doubt whether the treatment is worthwhile. This raises an essential question: Is the treatment sometimes worse than the disease itself? In many circumstances, patients must make a difficult decision: endure debilitating symptoms or accept a treatment that introduces a different set of challenges.

Numerous approaches have been used to treat neurological and psychiatric conditions throughout history; some have been successful, others have been detrimental, and many have had unforeseen implications. From early antipsychotic medications to modern dopamine-based therapies, the development of psychiatric medication reflects a continuous battle to strike a balance between tolerance and efficacy. Patients with conditions like schizophrenia and Parkinson's disease often face a difficult choice: manage symptoms with medication and endure side effects, or forego treatment and risk worsening of their condition. This dilemma is frequently explored in film, which can illustrate both the benefits and consequences of medical interventions.

This issue will be examined by analysing two films: A Beautiful Mind (2001) and Awakenings (1990), both of which illustrate the real-world implications of psychiatric and neurological treatments. A Beautiful Mind tells the story of John Nash, a talented mathematician who suffers from paranoid schizophrenia. His treatment involves strong antipsychotic drugs that effectively minimise his hallucinations while also impairing his cognitive abilities, making it difficult for him to operate. Faced with this trade-off, Nash eventually decides to discontinue his medicine, demonstrating the difficult decisions that patients with schizophrenia must make. In Awakenings, L-DOPA, a ground-breaking medication that momentarily restores motor function, is administered to individuals with encephalitis lethargica, a condition that resembles Parkinson's disease. However, the drug’s effects are short-lived, and many patients experience severe side effects such as involuntary movements, mood swings, and an eventual relapse into their catatonic state.

These films highlight a critical issue in medicine: the trade-off between symptom management and quality of life. While both treatments offer temporary relief, their long-term consequences often make the patients question whether they are truly better off. For instance, antipsychotic drugs have been linked to cognitive dulling, weight gain, and severe movement problems such as tardive dyskinesia, which is defined by involuntary muscular movements (Stroup and Gray, 2018). Similarly, long-term use of L-DOPA can result in psychological disorders like hallucinations, paranoia, and mood swings, as well as motor consequences such dyskinesia, even if it is highly effective in treating Parkinsonian symptoms (Chen, 2017).

By examining these two films, this project will evaluate whether modern medical treatments, despite their benefits, can introduce a new form of suffering that may be as bad as the disease itself. The discussion will also explore broader ethical implications, including patient autonomy, informed consent, and the psychological burden of living with both a disorder and its treatment. In a world where medical progress continues to advance, it is crucial to consider whether every treatment is truly beneficial, or whether some might create more harm than good.

# data[].attributes.body
The portrayal of John Nash's struggle with schizophrenia in A Beautiful Mind (2001) is a moving and complex examination of the challenges surrounding mental health treatments. Schizophrenia is a chronic mental health illness commonly treated with antipsychotic drugs. Nash is administered haloperidol, a first-generation antipsychotic that operates by inhibiting dopamine receptors in the brain (Patel et al., 2014). This process reduces psychotic symptoms such as hallucinations and delusions, but it also introduces severe side effects, depicted throughout the film. These include emotional blunting, extreme drowsiness, and a sense of detachment from reality, all of which have a considerable impact on Nash's ability to function and form meaningful relationships (Mosolov and Yaltonskaya, 2022).

Haloperidol has severe adverse effects, prompting Nash to question whether the medication is worth the cost. Though the drug helps alleviate his psychotic symptoms, it leaves him emotionally numb, unable to connect with his wife, colleagues, or even his own sense of self. This emotional detachment becomes a significant issue, raising the ethical question of whether a medication that restores cognitive function but impairs emotional well-being is truly beneficial. Nash's experience demonstrates a conundrum that many patients face: while medication can help with the clinical elements of mental illness, the side effects can have a negative influence on a patient's quality of life, making the treatment appear worse than the disease itself.

The film emphasises this tension by portraying Nash’s journey of finding balance. While haloperidol provides some relief from his hallucinations, Nash struggles with its cognitive and emotional side effects. His decision to eventually discontinue the drug emphasises a pivotal point in the film. He chooses to live with his symptoms rather than endure the debilitating consequences of the treatment. This option shows the complicated interplay between patient autonomy and the need for medical intervention. It implies that medical professionals' emphasis on symptom management may not always correspond with the patient's definition of a better quality of life (McKillip, Lott and Swetz, 2019).

On the other hand, cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) is portrayed in A Beautiful Mind as a supplementary treatment. Although therapy may not provide immediate relief like antipsychotic medication, it offers Nash a sustainable way to manage his delusions by helping him question their validity and develop coping strategies. CBT lacks the harsh side effects of antipsychotics, allowing Nash to regain emotional clarity and personal control. However, the film makes it evident that therapy alone is unable to treat the physiological aspects of schizophrenia, emphasising the importance of combining both approaches (Kart, Özdel and Türkçapar, 2021).

Ultimately the film demonstrates the delicate balance in schizophrenia treatment between the efficacy of antipsychotics and side effects, which frequently make the treatment appear worse than the condition. Nash's story exemplifies a larger issue in mental health treatment: how to effectively manage symptoms while maintaining the patient's dignity and quality of life. Through Nash's experience, the film invites viewers to contemplate the ethical implications of treatment, personal autonomy, and the moral responsibility of medical professionals to ensure that the cure does not become as harmful as the illness itself.