Is Internet Addiction a Medical Condition?
PreacherTom writes "Arising from such cases as a recent lawsuit with IBM over employee termination due to online sex chatting at work, recent debate over whether Internet abuse is a legitimate addiction, akin to alcoholism, is heating up. From the article: 'Attorneys say recognition by a court — whether in this or some future litigation — that Internet abuse is an uncontrollable addiction, and not just a bad habit, could redefine the condition as a psychological impairment worthy of protection under the Americans with Disabilities Act.' The condition could even make it into the next edition of the American Psychiatric Association's DSM, making it a full-blown neurosis. It wouldn't be a huge surprise, with a recent Stanford study showing that 14% of people state it would be 'hard to stay away from the Net for even a few days in a row."
on this. I quote myself:
The official diagnosis systems ICD and DSM currently have identical criteria for addiction to alcohol, illegal drugs and tobacco. Addiction to gambling, sex, internet etc are not mentioned, but psychologists who care about these addictions obviously use equivalient definitions.
The diagnosis systems mention 6-7 possible symptoms which can be classified into three groups:
- increased tolerance and/or abstinence problems
- signs of loss of control (strong craving/ compulsiveness or drinking more than planned or failed to cut down on use)
- damaging effects (social, health or work-related)
Currently no "symptoms" are mandatory. The addiction diagnosis demands that one has at least 3 of 6 symptoms through the previous year (ICD-10) or 4 of 7 at one point in life (DSM-IV). One does not need to have symptoms from all three groups, for instance is lack of control not a prerequsite.
Compared to regular medical diagnoses, it's remarkable that the important boundary between healthy and ill is set at an arbitrarily chosen number of symptoms (3 out of 6 or 4 out of 7)
xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
I experienced internet withdrawals back in 2002 when my DSL was taken away from me. The first month was hell. After three months i had totally forgotten i ever had the internet. The addiction is real as is an addiction to anything. The reason it's being considered a medical condition is because of the popularity of the addiction. I can honestly say i haven't had my own broadband connection until a month ago and now i feel i dont know how to surf the web, but atleast i dont waste time in front of a computer as much.
You constantly struggle for self improvement - and it shows.
Hooray for bad Engrish on fortune cookies
This article further supports my theory that the field of psychology is bunch of bull-shit. Neurology is a science. Psychology is a bunch of philosophers conjuring up imaginary diseases to reinforce everyone's imaginary "problems" I'm writing this Slashdot entry instead of doing office work right now. It doesn't mean I have a problem. I'm just bored.
Now really. Of course I wouldn't like being without internet access for several days, for the simple reason that a large part of my life is related to it somehow. With no internet I'd lose contact with many people, would find it much harder to find documentation for some of the work I do, etc.
But isn't every specialist that way? I bet that my father would also feel uncomfortable if he couldn't play the viola for a few days. For me, the main theme in my life is internet and computers. For others it's a musical instrument, drawing, playing soccer, etc. Everybody feels uncomfortable when they're unable to do their favourite activity for a while.
Even for "normal" people with no obsession with anything in particular it still works that way. When somebody's car breaks they're often grumpy while it's being fixed, as all of a sudden their freedom of movement got drastically reduced.
There probably are people with serious problems, but I think most of the people don't have any addiction of any sort, they simply became dependent on it, like many people depend on their car or telephone. For them it just became an indispensable tool.
I was travelling in Japan for about a week of my three-week stay. The schedule was created by my Japanese host who failed to schedule any time for rest. I was unable to check my email. As I was separated not only from my laptop but from the internet at large, I found myself becoming quite edgy until finally, she brought me to a media cafe allowing me to check emails, browse a few sites and finally restore peace and balance to myself.
While I am not sure I can fully understand the nature of addiction, I fear it. If by some chance, this was the sign of actual addiction, then I'm not sure what to do about it since it's an integral part of my work and my play. Many addictions stem, at least initially, from some sort of pleasure-rewarding recreational activity. In this case, it was more of a feeling of being cut off from a world or a life from which I get a certain level of comfort.
As to internet "behavior"? I have a hard time seeing that as being anything other than actionable by an employer. An employer can refuse to hire or may fire someone for being addicted to drugs or anything else that may be deemed as objectionable in the workplace. I'd say porn is right up there on the list.
The "medium" is one thing and the behavior is another. I think it's important to make that distinction.
Adults are SUPPOSED to be accountable for their actions and inactions. This means that if they find themselves dangerously addicted to something, they are supposed to do something to remedy the condition. You don't just stop at labeling something as a disease and throw your hands in the air. In a previous posting, I discussed a time when I found myself missing work so that I could play a video game. (XWing vs. Tie Fighter in that instance.) When I realized what I was doing, I made changes. It's what adults are supposed to do and what we are supposed to be teaching our children so that they become good adults.
So if someone is fired from their job for being addicted to drugs or alcohol, for being obese, for watching porn or chatting online at the office, then I think it's perfectly acceptable. I say this even though I am guilty of two of these offenses myself. I'm not willing to defend my own behavior by calling it a disease.
The internet just happens to be what they latch on to. Some people delve into alcohol, some into gambling,
Comparing internet and gambling addiction to alcohol addictions destroys the meaning of the word "addiction". If someone is "addicted" to the internet, or gambling, and you lock them in a room, they may get bored, anxious, etc.
However, do the same thing to someone addicted to alcohol, and they might die. That's real addiction.
These new kinds of "addictions" are really just habits, and not much more. "Habit" used to be a word, and the word was even applied to users of hard drugs in some cases, but now it's disappeared because it's not scary enough to get attention. Every habit has been elevated to the same level as addiction to attract research funds, shift blame away from people who make poor choices, and make better headlines.
Social scientists are inspired by theories; scientists are humbled by facts.