Slashdot Mirror

Some stress ? Sir, you have a Panic Attack Disorder
Having up and downs ? Well, you have a Bipolar Disorder
Sometimes bored ? That is Attention Deficit Disorder

No, you don't know what you're talking about. A disorder is diagnosed when someone experiences feelings and/or impulses that are well beyond that which a person could be expected to cope with. The experiences could be normal in their content (panic is a normal response to a stressful situation) or in the case of a psychosis totally bizarre.

To take the example of panic, if it can be controlled by some positive thinking, breathing deeply and carrying on, then it's not a disorder by definition. If the individual cannot control it, and it is beginning to seriously affect their life, then it is appropriate to consider diagnosing a 'disorder' and giving treatment. That treatment might just be reassurance and some breathing exercises, it might be medication or a formal psychological therapy - whatever will help.

Someone with bipolar disorder cannot function and live a normal life - they really can't. Their ability to function in the world is severely affected by what they are experiencing, and the change when given treatment can be dramatic. To say they have "ups and downs" is insulting. Same for ADD. There are formal diagnostic criteria for most psychiatric diagnoses that must be fulfilled: DSM-IV and ICD-10.

I do agree that often psychiatric disorders are over-diagnosed, often becuase of a desire not to 'blame' someone for their predicament and find a reason why it's not their fault. But occasional or even frequent mis-diagnosis doesn't mean something isn't real. Lots of people say they have 'flu' when in fact they just have a common cold. If someone really has influenza they will feel absolutely awful and may need medical care (older adults in Britain are given influenza vaccine because many will die if they contract it). Just because lots of people claim to have 'flu' doesn't mean that those who really are suffering from it should be dismissed as 'someone with a cold who's just whineing'.

Maybe that was a Good Thing, but should decisions like identifying the Best Scientific Achievement of a year and medical decisions of vast importance be something we leave open to the whims of politics? I realize that in this case there was no "buckling" from pressure but it apparently was intended to reflect political shifts of our time. Whatever the case, it just doesn't sit well with me.

1. suspects, without sufficient basis, that others are exploiting, harming, or deceiving him or her
2. is preoccupied with unjustified doubts about the loyalty or trustworthiness of friends or associates
3. is reluctant to confide in others because of unwarranted fear that the information will be used maliciously against him or her
4. reads hidden demeaning or threatening meanings into benign remarks or events
5. persistently bears grudges, i.e., is unforgiving of insults, injuries, or slights
6. perceives attacks on his or her character or reputation that are not apparent to others and is quick to react angrily or to counterattack
7. has recurrent suspicions, without justification, regarding fidelity of spouse or sexual partner

• The DSM IV (diagnostic and statistical manual)
• National Alliance for the Mentally Ill (find your local chapter and get as much support for the rest of the family as for her)
• schizophrenia.com (get literate and read like crazy [oops], and eventually get a sense of humor rather than just crying)
• Voices by Dream Theater, part of A Mind Beside Itself

Don't confuse schizophrenia vs. manic depression with paranoid delusions or other personality disorders. As I understand it, the distinction is that schizophrenics hallucinate (have false senses in realtime, as if something is really seen or heard) whereas that type of manic depressives do not (they may confabulate memories of having seen or heard something).

I'm not the author, but here's a link to read more. I want to first warn you though, lacking a psychological specialist background in reading these disorders, is going to cause you to reach conclusions about others that are not accurate(depending on how honest and objective you are about yourself, you'll be wondering if perhaps you don't fit the bill for several of these as well). Some people are just quirky. Some people smoke pot too much, or drink too much. Some people put up fronts as a defensive mechanism, and whatever conclusions you reach based upon your interaction with those fronts, are going to be in error.

http://www.psychologynet.org/dsm.html

Also keep in mind the questionable and theoretical nature of psychology. Personally, I see traits of most major "disorders" in every person I've ever interacted with for long periods of time. But that does not a disorder make. What is ordered? Is it like the majority of Christians who don't forgive, don't turn the other cheek, who supposedly serve "Jesus", while being perfect assholes, doing little to nothing what he taught we ought to do? Or the Muslims who in the name of holiness, commit barbaric and unholy acts? Or perhaps it's well ordered like magical societies, who say prayers to various dieties believing that these figments of their imagination give them magick power and deeper understanding? Or maybe well ordered are the lying politicians, the soldiers brainwashed and trained to kill people, the high minded selfish pricks at Halliburton and all other big corps who take what they want and fuck everyone else, or even just the people here on Slashdot who presume so much about themselves, that they think they can make intimate personal diagnosis of people they've never met or known on a personal level?

I like to think of it as Buddha taught it: The world is vanity fair. Everyone lives in their own self made reality, and that is the source of everyones problems. Jesus had it right too, if you look deeper than the fundamentalcase interpretation of what he taught: DENY YOURSELF(your self made reality), TAKE UP YOUR CROSS(accept your reality for what it is, denying your Self the opportunity to interpret it), and follow me(speaking on behalf of Truth-That Which Is).

You're confusing personality disorders with the a particular definition of anti-social behavior. Everyone has personality disorders at all times, whether the person is functional can be shown by actions he takes which are deemed detrmental to society by (in our case) laws and public opinion. If you (the reader, not necessary the author of the post I'm replying to) do not think you have a disorder, check his website or see http://www.psychologynet.org/dsm.html See if you can't pick a handful of disorders that even in some small way could be attributed to you. This doesn't mean you're a sick person of course...it's psych 101 and why trained doctors spend all that time going to school.

I'm annoyed with this article precisely because there is an insinuation that game playing may have been thought dangerous to society, but is now shown to be "OK" because "normal" people (definined as those who socialize with friends and do not completely self-dstruct their career) do it too. The argument of the article seems fundamentally flawed as well as it's support, but the support is downright insulting.

The article made a few other unfair insinuations that makes me mad (yet not homicidal! don't call the police!):

1) That being a hermit is bad

2) That even normal socializing individuals occasionally play games in mom's house; but fear not they often do such important things as hanging out with friends

3) That somehow spending time with ones friends is a superior form of entertainment than with ones game console

I do not see why it ought to be an acceptable and commonly held belief that to be normal you must socialize unless you are a) at work/school or b) performing a critical task for a spouse or family member. Why is it important to "get out" and "meet people"? Why is being a hermit a bad thing? Why can't get up, go to a job, do good work, come home and plant myself in front of my PC for some good EQage? Although I happen to be married, even if I wasn't, am I hurting anyone?

My annoyance is probably irrational (relax, you don't have to call the police yet either), as one poster replied writing sensational stories sells ads, and making the masses feel comfortable sells even more. I am still annoyed however at the high-school clique nonsense that seems to make it into "respected" news sources like CNN.

This idea that the Segway was going to replace our jobs in web development with urban transportation infrastructure reengineering jobs, produced a societal trauma that left us all with the illusion that /., Wired magazine and NASDAQ were still relevant to our lives -- along with a syndrome of other symptoms that should probably receive disability insurance indemnification as well as a place in the DSM IV under "Acute Segway Trauma Syndrome".

1. The Parliamentary Assembly is concerned that increasing numbers of children in certain Council of Europe member states are being diagnosed as suffering from "attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder" (ADHD), "hyperkinetic disorder" or related behavioural conditions and treated by means of central nervous system stimulants such as amphetamines or methylphenidate, which are controlled drugs listed in Schedule II of the 1971 United Nations Convention on Psychotropic Substances because they have been judged by the World Health Organisation to be liable to abuse, to constitute a substantial risk to public health, and to have little to moderate therapeutic usefulness.

3. Although their precise causes are unknown, the validity of ADHD and hyperkinetic disorders, defined in terms of persistent and severe behavioural symptoms centred on inattention, hyperactivity and impulsiveness and resulting in functional impairment, is widely recognised by professional medical, psychological and scientific organisations, including the World Health Organisation. However, the Assembly is concerned that two different sets of criteria are applied in diagnosing these disorders: one adopted by the American Psychiatric Association and used worldwide, the other, more stringent, by the World Health Organisation. The Assembly considers that the basis for these different standards should be examined with a view to clarifying and harmonising the criteria governing diagnosis and treatment.

1. You're not a trained medical practitioner, so you're not qualified to make a diagnosis
2. No one can diagnose themselves

What you're looking for is the DSM-IV.