Sluggishly progressing schizophrenia

[SoulRiser]

What does this remind you of?

Quote:Sluggishly progressing schizophrenia was a fifth category of schizophrenia diagnosed by psychiatrists in the Soviet Union. At the time, Western psychiatry recognized only four types of schizophrenia: Catatonic, hebephrenic, paranoid, and simple. The diagnostic criteria for this additional category were so vague that it could be applicable to virtually any person not suffering from mental function impairment and having interests beyond survival needs. This diagnosis was often applied to dissidents who were not in fact mentally ill so that they could be forcibly hospitalized in mental institutions and subjected to different treatments including powerful anti-depressants and electroconvulsive therapy.

The existence of this diagnosis has led to questions on the part of supporters of anti-psychiatry about the existence of schizophrenia in general; whether it is diagnosed properly, and about political misuses of the schizophrenia diagnosis in the West.

Note that modern psychiatry now does contain a fifth category; undifferentiated schizophrenia. This is similar to sluggishly progressing schizophrenia only in that it serves as a catch-all categorization for any schizophrenic person who does not easily fit into the other forms. It does, however, require psychotic symptoms to be present for a diagnosis.

Found it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sluggishly ... izophrenia

[Guest]

It reminds me of all attempts to degrade others by science. True, children and teenagers are not fully developed. But that is no reason to degrade us and call us nonpersons. We are forced into school by adults, not because we are young, but because they are "older, wiser, and better" than the young.

[SoulRiser]

It reminded me of kids getting diagnosed with ADHD and ODD and whatever else, and being put on Ritalin just because people don't know how else to "handle" them.

[Guest]

I agree with you SoulRiser. Through psychology we have seen that ADHD is not just being hyperactive and unable to concentrate, it's a mental problem. But as you said SoulRiser, some teachers get students to take Ritalin, even if they don't have ADHD, just because of the teacher's inability to handle them.

The opposite of diagnosing improperly also happens. A "bad" teenager may have ADHD but the teacher either ignores it or does not know that the person has it. The same can happen with a person that has asthma. There are some gym teachers who would refuse to take asthma as an "excuse" for not doing well in class. Doing this harms the person because they cannot control what they are doing but are still being punished for it.

[xcriteria]

Yeah, diagnoses do go two ways. I meet the criteria for "predominantly inattentive" ADD (meaning no hyperactivity), but I was never diagnosed with that or anything at school, despite having atrocious grades and participation through junior high and high school. People who meet these criteria are usually really quiet, and so teachers never bother to look into it. But the loud, hyperactive, or oppositional students pose a disturbance to the class, and often drugs get prescribed just to "manage" them. In both cases, what should matter most is the optimal mental functioning and learning of the student -- and their quality of life.

And then there are factors like temperament, learning styles, and personal preferences that are rarely given any serious consideration by teachers or psychiatrists. This partly because teachers are stuck teaching to a mixed group with little if any one-on-one time with them as individuals. And with psychiatrists, they are trained to think purely in terms of disorders and usually medication, leaving any other approaches to some other professional.

At least differences in ability get some consideration, but this is usually limited to some accelerated classes or maybe some "enrichment" sessions with logic puzzles. Differences in interest get virtually no consideration.

Okay, kinda off-topic rant over.