"Mental disorders" don't exist

[sswbm]

If you've been tricked into believing you have a "mental disorder";

"Mental disorders" don't exist. Not fitting the human stereotype is considered to be some sort of disease, called a "mental disorder" or "mental disability". So they don't exist. Autism, AD(H)D, OCD, etc. etc., don't exist. It's all made up.

[Sharpie]

If you're going to make a claim like this it'd be a good idea to provide some sources and evidence to support it, rather than saying some vague "tis a conspiracy" esque stuff.


"Mental disorders don't exist because not being normal means you have a mental disorder therefore they don't exist"


Like

Wut

[xcriteria]

Definitely something to discuss. In many cases, mental disorder labels are applied when the issue is better described by a person simply being different, and maybe it's the situation they're in (like school, parenting, etc.) that needs to change.

However, there are people who legitimately suffer from what very much are mental disorders. Some prefer to use different language, but things like severe depression, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia can manifest in ways that really cause problems.

Even ADHD can. I have ADD-like symptoms, I meet the diagnostic criteria for the inattentive subtype, and I've been diagnosed with it. These attentional issues have, and sometimes still do, cause problems for me. I think that my differences in cognition aren't primarily a "disorder," but I think sometimes labels and categories can be useful.

Most DSM diagnoses have, in addition to other criteria, language like "the symptoms must cause clinically significant distress or clinically significant impairment in social, academic or occupational functioning." Of course, if a person is struggling in an ill-fitting school, academic, or home situation, that may be the main problem that should be diagnosed, rather than labeling the person. But the overall idea is that disorders are only supposed to be diagnosed when there's a serious problem going on.

Here's one article on that topic: The Significance of Clinical Significance, which opens with, "Psychiatric symptoms are fairly ubiquitous in the general population—most normal people have at least one, many have a few. When present in isolation, a single symptom (or even a few) does not a psychiatric disorder make."

Psychiatrist Ed Hallowell has made a point about about how it's critical to look at a person's situation, like at school or work, and change that if there's a problem. For example, this article preview is a good summary: Managing Yourself: What Brain Science Tells Us About How to Excel

One problem is when people fail to see that labels and categories are tools that people use, and which can be used in maladaptive ways. Also, in many cases there are better labels and categories to use and focus on than "disorder" vs. "normal" thinking.

There's also the side of it that people aren't necessarily stuck with problems they may have forever... in many cases, it's possible to learn, grow, and overcome problems.

Thoughts?

[xcriteria]

This documentary about bipolar disorder with Stephen Fry is worth checking out. If this isn't a disorder, what is it?



Watch on YouTube

The Icarus Project provides one take on that:

"The Icarus Project envisions a new culture and language that resonates with our actual experiences of 'mental illness' rather than trying to fit our lives into a conventional framework. We are a network of people living with and/or affected by experiences that are often diagnosed and labeled as psychiatric conditions. We believe these experiences are mad gifts needing cultivation and care, rather than diseases or disorders. By joining together as individuals and as a community, the intertwined threads of madness, creativity, and collaboration can inspire hope and transformation in an oppressive and damaged world. Participation in The Icarus Project helps us overcome alienation and tap into the true potential that lies between brilliance and madness."

But, it remains the case that some people do have differences in the way their minds work that can cause significant distress and/or impairment, even beyond the impacts of an oppressive and damaged world.

Another side of it all, though, is diagnoses being used as a means of oppression and control where they aren't serving a legitimate purpose. Diagnosing kids who are bored in school with ADHD and medicating them, when a different learning environment would actually be interesting and capture their attention, is one example. The term "political psychiatry" is used to describe situations where people are diagnosed and controlled for reasons beyond an actual attempt to help people... see Political abuse of psychiatry on Wikipedia, for example.

But that doesn't mean others don't have very real problems, benefit from identifying them somehow, and seeking help for them...

It's kind of a complicated puzzle. What's your experience with mental disorder labels, if you don't mind sharing?

[Mo the jo]

Kinda reminds me of scientology, actually.

[xcriteria]

(11-05-2014 05:59 AM)Mo the jo Wrote:  Kinda reminds me of scientology, actually.

What does?

[Username]

"Hey, it's totally okay to saw limbs off of people and mail them to your ex-girlfriend!"

u 'avin a laff m8?

[Mo the jo]

One of the ideas of scientology is that there's no such thing as psychological disorders. L Ron Hubberd, the creater of scientology, (who lived from 1911-86) hated psychology, and believed it was barbaric and corrupt.

[KFC Nyan Cat]

Nah, you are full of BS. Maybe things like ADHD aren't real disorders, but mental disorders are real. You tryin' to recruit Scientologists?

[James Comey]

Mental disorders exist, true and simple, and to adopt this kind of philosophy is dangerous; there are people who are suffering because of these conditions that are outside of their control, and it can blow up really bad. Treatment isn't a bad thing (in fact, I need some treatment....).

On the other hand, it is true though that people with mental disorders are badly stigmatized in such a bad way that it's understandable to see this PoV (I'm looking at you, IDEA and Autism Speaks!). Our society favors the habits of extroverted neurotypicals, and unlike other things that might be propagated as "normal" such as race and class, these habits have been seamlessly accepted into our society without any kind of questioning, as "normal". Really though, the real solution is not abandoning a useful concept of understanding how different minds work, but in reality find ways of helping everyone without discriminating (whether blatantly or indirectly).

In the end though, everyone thinks differently, and I agree, it's time we stopped discriminating against those that just are really different. However, again, abandoning classifications that are backed up and vouched for will solve nothing and will instead be a big step backwards.

[Mo the jo]

Oh no, no, I don't believe that. I think psychological disorders are real. And no, I'm not a scientologist, nor do I practice it or believe in it.

[James Comey]

I never said that about you mo, I was just giving my 2 cents on the topic in general.

[Mo the jo]

Oh, OK. Well, I do think that mental disorders are real. I don't discriminate against people, myself. After all, I face discrimination myself, I know how it feels.

[brainiac3397]

I have bunch of mental problems. Im just batshit crazy.

[Sharpie]

If you want proof that mental disorders exist just have a ten minute conversation with me.

[KFC Nyan Cat]

(11-05-2014 01:41 PM)Sharpie Wrote:  If you want proof that mental disorders exist just have a ten minute conversation with me.

Yeah, have a 10-minute conversation with Sharpie if you truly believe mental disorders are fake!

[Sharpie]

>Repeat exactly what i say


So originalll

[thewake]

http://reason.com/archives/2000/07/01/cu...ic-state-t

[timf]

This is a challenging subject because there are a number of factors to consider and define.

Prior to WWII most Psychiatric patients were those who were unable to function to care for themselves. These patients included those who were violent and those like severe autism who would only rock back and forth and drool. Frequently autopsies of these patients would show severe brain damage or other neurological deformation. My father took a residency in psychiatry around this time and later told me of a number of institutionalized people who were there as well because their families wanted control of their financial interests.

After WWII a class of drugs that included Thorazine allowed administrators of psychiatric institutions to more easily manage their patients by keeping them ambulatory and compliant. While no one could actually claim that these drugs "cured" anything, it was often seen as helpful because the patients seemed less agitated.

Schooling was increasingly systematized after WWII as well. Prior to this if someone did not do well in school they left and it was not much considered. In 1966 a paper was written by Sam Clements, assistant professor at the University of Arkansas, funded by the Easter Seal society and the department of Health Education, and Welfare called "Minimal Brain Dysfunction in Children". The thesis was an assumption that the failure of children to thrive in a school environment must be the result of some so far indiscernible brain defect. Thus began a long process of describing all sorts of behaviors as worthy of medical treatment.

If one considers the appropriateness of medicating behavior, a case can certainly be made for those who would otherwise freeze to death under a bridge or attack others. However, the practice of medicating children for their failure to be compliant in the classroom may be more symptomatic of deficiencies in education as opposed to deficiencies in the child.

If one considers the large differences of people in their neurological sensing and processing abilities, and one considers the degree of collectivization occurring in modern life, one can see the possibility that some neurological diversity will not fit well with a homogenized society.

Those who do not fit well are often called "disordered". They may have a variety of reactions to not fitting well. These reactions may manifest as depression and anxiety. Doctors will often prescribe a SSRI to help the person cope with their disorder.

Neurological diversity can include variations in the ability to create and eliminate various chemicals in the brain. The interaction of these chemicals and their rates of creation and absorption can give each person unique experiences of the world around them. The medical practice of widely prescribing SSRI drugs is not so much because so many people reabsorb serotonin too quickly, but more that "if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail".

Some people appreciate SSRI drugs because it makes them feel better. This could be from an actual condition that benefits from delaying the uptake of serotonin or it could be for other reasons such as masking the discomfort from not confronting some difficulty in life that needs to be corrected.

One of the most contentious areas on the subject of psychiatric drugs is who should use them and who should be made to use them.

Another area of contention is if they are to be used to increase manageability, compilability, feeling good or less bad.

Complicating things is the fact that what has been approved by the government is a small sample of what is available. For example, suppose someone wanted an increase in dopamine rather than serotonin. They might want to add fava beans to their diet.

Regions that have little natural lithium in their soil also often have higher rates of mental illness and incarceration than regions with higher levels in the soils and food supply.

If one considers that the industrial agriculture has achieved lower cost but at the price of depleted soil chemicals, one might suspect that a number of "illnesses" might be attributable to nutritional deficiencies.

In India as industrialization arrived and the pace of life quickened, the Brahmin class of people were subjected to social stresses they had not much encountered previously. As a result, there was an increase in mental illness that some have attributed to environmental stress factors.

When most families consist of two working parents, much of child instruction and training is a result of day care exposure to TV. There can be developmental deficiencies from family experiences that imprint a child with behavior that is not fundamentally neurological in origin.

If one were to consider what would be offensive regarding the subject of psychiatric drugs;

1. Someone deciding what you should take.
2. Someone deciding what you should not take.
3. Only being offered medically approved options.
4. Being told you have to take something to compensate for the effect of a dietary, developmental, or environmental influence.
5. Being told that you cannot take something to compensate for the effect of a dietary, developmental, or environmental influence.
6. Being labeled and categorized because of your behavior.
7. Being told that you have to be drugged to be acceptable to others.
8. Being told that you are not allowed to take drugs to make yourself acceptable to others.

Consider the most widely used psychiatric drug, alcohol.

1. Some people feel it is necessary for them to function.
2. Some see it as a curse that destroys lives.
3. Some see no problem for light recreational use.
4. Some like the way it makes them feel.
5. Some see families that are destroyed by it.

Consider the ways we have of dealing with it;

1. Sales are restricted to those that are over 18/21.
2. Advertising is restricted.
3. Overindulgence is criminalized.
4. Volunteers work to help each other stop using it.

With alcohol we have made a societal decision not to ban it. We leave the decision of whether to use it or not up to the individual even though we know it causes harm and kills people.

It might be fair to say that the psychiatric medical community enjoys a reputation far greater than it deserves based on what it really understands and can treat. It might also be fair to say that often economic factors (like labeling all sorts of behaviors as needing "treatment") drive the diagnosis and treatment of people far more than good medical practice would warrant. However, there are people whose lives are made better (according to them) by the services they receive from this community.

I would have a problem if this community received monopoly status such that alternatives were denied to people. Since it is the nature of large collectives to want to get larger and increased control, I am very very much concerned that with time, this community will want to govern what I consider to be my realm of choice.

While it is obvious that this community has lost a lot of credibility making money out of an industry of providing chemicals to children, mixed in are some things that actually help people.

[Missile]

I wouldn't call autism a "disorder"

[Dikont5]

This is my own opinion so sorry if I seem to biased.
In today's societal terms simply appearing or acting different from other people can cause the victim to be labeled with a disorder he, she, any other gender I didn't specify they may not have. Thus, people try to "help" them in which they may get frustrated and turn to other forms of outlets in order to relieve themselves, which can spiral into depression. There are people with severe psychological disorders and there are those who have mild disorders but feel alone because people shun them for what they have, not who they are.

Really, a lot of psychiatrists are willing to prescribe prescriptions for people who may not need them, and coupled with school saying that anyone who is different is mental causes a lot of problems for many kids who are being viewed differently form who they are. Basically, a "disorder" has to do with more of neurological differences in people which everyone has, but whichever "disorder" shows itself the most due to social and environmental conditions is perceived as bad. Psychology is a hard field to understand, and part of the reason is because the majority of people aren't willing to donate their brains to science, so psychology has a lot to do with guesswork and other fields of science in order to determine various disorders.

The majority of this was written from my own personal experience with a "disorder" which was autism, and how society perceives people who are simply different.

[Username]

(11-07-2014 02:45 PM)Dikont5 Wrote:  Really, a lot of psychiatrists are willing to prescribe prescriptions for people who may not need them

How is this a bad thing?

[rustyspoonaward2000]

MENTAL DISORDERS EXIST MY AND MY FREINDS EM'

[brainiac3397]

Individualistic consciousness is a mental disorder.

[KFC Nyan Cat]

(11-07-2014 10:11 PM)Username Wrote:  

(11-07-2014 02:45 PM)Dikont5 Wrote:  Really, a lot of psychiatrists are willing to prescribe prescriptions for people who may not need them

How is this a bad thing?

It's a waste of those peoples' money, and I haven't looked into it, but I think there are health consequences.

Seriously, just give them Sugar Pills.

[Alistoriv]

This just in, Jop doesn't exist.

[sswbm]

(11-16-2014 08:19 AM)Alistoriv Wrote:  This just in, Jop doesn't exist.

I'm here

[Username]

(11-16-2014 08:19 AM)Alistoriv Wrote:  This just in, Jop doesn't exist.

[Alistoriv]

(11-16-2014 09:31 PM)Jop Wrote:  

(11-16-2014 08:19 AM)Alistoriv Wrote:  This just in, Jop doesn't exist.

I'm here

No you aren't

[brainiac3397]

Like they say in philosophy "What chair?"