Psychiatrists rewriting the mental health bible

[bemildred]

Reporting from San Francisco -- Is the compulsion to hoard things a mental disorder? How about the practice of eating excessively at night?

And what of Internet addiction: Should it be diagnosed and treated?

As the clock ticks toward the release of the most influential of mental health textbooks, psychiatrists are asking themselves thousands of complex and sometimes controversial questions.

The answers will determine how Americans' mental health is assessed, diagnosed and treated.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-sci-mental-disorder26-2009may26,0,3081443.story?page=1

[ensho]

1. this is a very important issue

nt

[Mythsaje]

2. If they qualify every little human quirk

they're going to end up making themselves pretty damned redundant. Basically EVERYONE will have a mental disorder of one kind or another. So then what? We can't even treat the really fucked up ones half the time.

[salvorhardin]

3. That's a danger but not the intention

Basically one of the big criticisms of DSM IV is that in order for someone to be diagnosed they have to reach this critical threshold by which time their illness has advanced to a degree that makes it much more resistant to treatment. Furthermore, advances in brain imaging and a better understanding of cognition, decision making, attention, addiction and emotion have led to a more nuanced, organic model of mental illness that allows us to see certain types of behaviors as precursors or early stage mental illness. The idea is to reformulate the DSM to better reflect those advances so that people can get treatment well before they reach the "really fucked up" stage.

But I do share your concern with the tendency to medicalize even normal human behavior.

[Mythsaje]

4. Yeah, I get that.

And, for the most part, I agree with the intent. The problem will be determining the warning signs of someone who's just eccentric and who's wired to slide into something that will indeed be a problem. Psychology interests me a great deal--I find the puzzle of the human brain (sentience and proto-sentience in general) very fascinating. If I went back to school, that's what I'd study.

People are freakin' weird. All of us. On some level. So many things that affect our day to day lives are internal things that we have very little control over. Little obsessions, sexual kinks, specific social and generalized anxieties. I'm curious where they'll draw the lines in this.

[tridim]

6. IMO legalizing Cannabis would help with generalized anxiety

At least it helps me.

I'm as stressed as anyone and am on no pharmaceutical drugs. Pot works just fine, and it's 100% natural and non toxic.

[Mythsaje]

11. For some, perhaps... for some, the opposite will happen.

I've seen it.

[bemildred]

12. I have to say, in that regard, that as with any drug, dosage is everything.

"Getting wasted" is not at all the same thing as "getting high". Nobody gives you a medical prescription that says "take as much as your stupid friends tell you to". So it's a problem, but it's not the drugs fault, so to speak.

[Mythsaje]

15. How did Gallagher put it? "Don't smoke dope..."

"When you're already stoned. You don't get any higher, just lower on dope."

[tridim]

13. I've seen it too. A few times.

But in my non-scientific opinion stress relief is the norm and anxiety is the exception. Probably 10:1.

[Mythsaje]

14. It's a great stress reliever--in the right situation.

Not so good for someone with social anxiety who has to make a run to the grocery store for munchies. LOL

[bemildred]

10. Well, to me, the question is who decides that you have a problem?

Where people seek help, and accept an offered therapy, there is no problem, other than whether the therapy is fraudulent, the therapist a fake, or that sort of thing.

On the other hand, where you have "experts" deciding that people who do not want treatment, and who have not actually done anything illegal, are going to get treatment anyway, whether they like it or not, I see big problems. Medical care is not supposed to be an excuse for enforcement of social conformity.

Drug "abuse" is a perfect example. Should people that "abuse drugs", yet otherwise conduct their lives in a perfectly responsible way be forced to accept "treatment" of one sort of another? How does that jibe with the promise that we are free to pursue "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"?

There are thorny issues here. Some drug abuse is illegal. Other kinds of drug abuse are legal. Determining whether someone has "harmed" someone else can be obvious if it is a matter of assault and battery, or contentious if someone argues that they were "harmed" psychologically. If you piss someone off, have you done them psychological harm? Who decides?

[Wednesdays]

5. K&R

:kick:

[RufusTFirefly]

7. I smell money!

New syndromes mean new drugs. Woo hoo! Hooray for Big Pharma!!

[Triana]

8. excessive bitterness may also be listed as a disorder

from what I understand..

http://blogs.psychologytoday.com/blog/side-effects/200905/bitterness-the-next-mental-disorder

[ananda]

9. DSM gettng larger so that more designer drugs can be made.

Guess who profits?