Total Posts:19|Showing Posts:1-19
Jump to topic:

the DSM-V

nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2011 1:57:36 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
As some of you may or may not know, the DSM-IV-TR (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) is currently under revision.

One of the proposed additions is "hypersexual disorder", which can be found here http://www.dsm5.org...

Now, in my humble opinion, this is kind of ridiculous. But what about you? What do you think the political and societal implications of classifying this as a mental disorder are, if any?
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2011 2:02:49 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/14/2011 1:57:36 PM, nonentity wrote:
As some of you may or may not know, the DSM-IV-TR (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) is currently under revision.

One of the proposed additions is "hypersexual disorder", which can be found here http://www.dsm5.org...

Now, in my humble opinion, this is kind of ridiculous. But what about you? What do you think the political and societal implications of classifying this as a mental disorder are, if any?

I think it can be thought of as a possible source of addiction... not so much a mental disorder.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2011 2:04:16 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
The whole DSM is a joke. It pretty much makes way for anything to be a mental disorder. Honestly, the whole classification of mental disorders is arbitrary in psychology. I really don't have faith in a system where homosexual behavior can be removed as a medical disorder because of political pressure.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2011 2:17:14 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/14/2011 2:04:16 PM, darkkermit wrote:
The whole DSM is a joke. It pretty much makes way for anything to be a mental disorder. Honestly, the whole classification of mental disorders is arbitrary in psychology. I really don't have faith in a system where homosexual behavior can be removed as a medical disorder because of political pressure.

Transgenderedness (I forget the exact phrasing) is still a disorder on there though.

It's extremely difficult to classify mental disorders... I haven't had the (dis)pleasure of reading the entire DSM-IV-TR but many of them are valid.

Others, like "hypersexual disorder" lol and "premenstrual dysphoric disorder" ie. PMS (it's apparently been used as a defense in several murder cases) are just completely ridiculous.
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2011 2:31:00 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/14/2011 1:57:36 PM, nonentity wrote:
As some of you may or may not know, the DSM-IV-TR (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) is currently under revision.

One of the proposed additions is "hypersexual disorder", which can be found here http://www.dsm5.org...

Now, in my humble opinion, this is kind of ridiculous. But what about you? What do you think the political and societal implications of classifying this as a mental disorder are, if any?:

I think the APA (American Psychiatric Association) classifies any disorder as severely impacting a person's ability to function within the confines of what the APA designates as "normal behavior."

I think there are some people with hypersexual addictions, and that it's a problem. However, Orthorexia is a disorder classified by the ADA as a "healthy eating disorder." That is, they believe that if you're obsessed with eating right, that you must have a disorder.

It's a little disconcerting how much control the APA and their international counterparts have on what is sane and insane, normal and abnormal behavior. These people play God, and even though I'm sure I could find a lot of legitimacy, I could just as easily see an overactive imagination.

These are the same people who once classified homosexuality as a sexual disorder, until massive public pressure prompted them to lift the DSM classification. It just goes to show you that you cannot always leave things up to the "experts."
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2011 3:34:43 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I'm guessing there are some financial motives involved too. I know that insurance companies are somewhat bound by these "medical" diagnoses and so are grants that are procured for researching some of these conditions.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2011 3:51:38 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/14/2011 2:04:16 PM, darkkermit wrote:
The whole DSM is a joke. It pretty much makes way for anything to be a mental disorder. Honestly, the whole classification of mental disorders is arbitrary in psychology. I really don't have faith in a system where homosexual behavior can be removed as a medical disorder because of political pressure.

Whereas I don't believe that a scientific classification should be changed due to political influences, I find a classification system that's inclined to alter due to evolving perspectives and new discoveries more reliable than one that is not.

Homosexual behavior is not a medical disorder.
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2011 6:47:58 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/14/2011 3:34:43 PM, innomen wrote:
I'm guessing there are some financial motives involved too. I know that insurance companies are somewhat bound by these "medical" diagnoses and so are grants that are procured for researching some of these conditions.

Pharmaceutical companies ghostwrite in psychiatric journals. ;)
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2011 6:49:22 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/14/2011 2:04:16 PM, darkkermit wrote:
The whole DSM is a joke. It pretty much makes way for anything to be a mental disorder. Honestly, the whole classification of mental disorders is arbitrary in psychology. I really don't have faith in a system where homosexual behavior can be removed as a medical disorder because of political pressure.

Ya need to think why it was in there firstly.
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2011 6:56:18 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/14/2011 1:57:36 PM, nonentity wrote:
Now, in my humble opinion, this is kind of ridiculous. But what about you?

Criteria B is the key to what constitutes a disorder (paedophilia and some PDs are the exemptions from memory). A lists are simply there to narrow down behaviours to tailor treatments. It's not such a big deal as an inclusion.

As for whether a diagnosis is necessary, that's questionable. It's largely circular (the behaviour list has a name, the name is short hand for a behavioural checklist) and the label really only applies to specific treatment schools, government funding, statistics etc. Treatment wise you really only need to know the behavioural aspects that leads to the dysfunction or impairment.
nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2011 10:48:53 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/15/2011 6:56:18 AM, Puck wrote:
At 1/14/2011 1:57:36 PM, nonentity wrote:
Now, in my humble opinion, this is kind of ridiculous. But what about you?

Criteria B is the key to what constitutes a disorder (paedophilia and some PDs are the exemptions from memory). A lists are simply there to narrow down behaviours to tailor treatments. It's not such a big deal as an inclusion.


That could apply to anything though.

I could say I have a shopping addiction that significally impairs my standard of living but that would just be a problem associated with my depression, and not its own diagnosis.

As for whether a diagnosis is necessary, that's questionable. It's largely circular (the behaviour list has a name, the name is short hand for a behavioural checklist) and the label really only applies to specific treatment schools, government funding, statistics etc. Treatment wise you really only need to know the behavioural aspects that leads to the dysfunction or impairment.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2011 11:01:55 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/15/2011 6:49:22 AM, Puck wrote:
At 1/14/2011 2:04:16 PM, darkkermit wrote:
The whole DSM is a joke. It pretty much makes way for anything to be a mental disorder. Honestly, the whole classification of mental disorders is arbitrary in psychology. I really don't have faith in a system where homosexual behavior can be removed as a medical disorder because of political pressure.

Ya need to think why it was in there firstly.

The DSM considered any behavior that does not conform to traditional society abnormal. I do not think it should be constituted as a disorder, but I don't think many things in DSM should be constituted as a disorder.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2011 11:16:19 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/15/2011 11:01:55 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 1/15/2011 6:49:22 AM, Puck wrote:
At 1/14/2011 2:04:16 PM, darkkermit wrote:
The whole DSM is a joke. It pretty much makes way for anything to be a mental disorder. Honestly, the whole classification of mental disorders is arbitrary in psychology. I really don't have faith in a system where homosexual behavior can be removed as a medical disorder because of political pressure.

Ya need to think why it was in there firstly.

The DSM considered any behavior that does not conform to traditional society abnormal. I do not think it should be constituted as a disorder, but I don't think many things in DSM should be constituted as a disorder.

Then why would you say the whole DSM is a joke?
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2011 11:21:25 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/15/2011 11:16:19 AM, nonentity wrote:
At 1/15/2011 11:01:55 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 1/15/2011 6:49:22 AM, Puck wrote:
At 1/14/2011 2:04:16 PM, darkkermit wrote:
The whole DSM is a joke. It pretty much makes way for anything to be a mental disorder. Honestly, the whole classification of mental disorders is arbitrary in psychology. I really don't have faith in a system where homosexual behavior can be removed as a medical disorder because of political pressure.

Ya need to think why it was in there firstly.

The DSM considered any behavior that does not conform to traditional society abnormal. I do not think it should be constituted as a disorder, but I don't think many things in DSM should be constituted as a disorder.

Then why would you say the whole DSM is a joke?

Its not a true practical guide for diagnosing mental disorders. The whole classification system is just bad.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2011 11:26:02 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/15/2011 11:21:25 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 1/15/2011 11:16:19 AM, nonentity wrote:
At 1/15/2011 11:01:55 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 1/15/2011 6:49:22 AM, Puck wrote:
At 1/14/2011 2:04:16 PM, darkkermit wrote:
The whole DSM is a joke. It pretty much makes way for anything to be a mental disorder. Honestly, the whole classification of mental disorders is arbitrary in psychology. I really don't have faith in a system where homosexual behavior can be removed as a medical disorder because of political pressure.

Ya need to think why it was in there firstly.

The DSM considered any behavior that does not conform to traditional society abnormal. I do not think it should be constituted as a disorder, but I don't think many things in DSM should be constituted as a disorder.

Then why would you say the whole DSM is a joke?

Its not a true practical guide for diagnosing mental disorders. The whole classification system is just bad.

How would you do it differently?
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2011 10:27:06 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/15/2011 10:48:53 AM, nonentity wrote:
At 1/15/2011 6:56:18 AM, Puck wrote:
At 1/14/2011 1:57:36 PM, nonentity wrote:
Now, in my humble opinion, this is kind of ridiculous. But what about you?

Criteria B is the key to what constitutes a disorder (paedophilia and some PDs are the exemptions from memory). A lists are simply there to narrow down behaviours to tailor treatments. It's not such a big deal as an inclusion.


That could apply to anything though.

I could say I have a shopping addiction that significally impairs my standard of living but that would just be a problem associated with my depression, and not its own diagnosis.

Addictions are not relevant to depression, so no. Comorbidity. :P
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2011 10:29:55 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/15/2011 11:01:55 AM, darkkermit wrote:
The DSM considered any behavior that does not conform to traditional society abnormal. I do not think it should be constituted as a disorder, but I don't think many things in DSM should be constituted as a disorder.

So what's the issue with its removal if it's recognised as not valid. The political pressure was necessary as a balance check to the absurdities that parts of the DSM were based upon.
nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/16/2011 10:27:57 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/15/2011 10:27:06 PM, Puck wrote:
At 1/15/2011 10:48:53 AM, nonentity wrote:
At 1/15/2011 6:56:18 AM, Puck wrote:
At 1/14/2011 1:57:36 PM, nonentity wrote:
Now, in my humble opinion, this is kind of ridiculous. But what about you?

Criteria B is the key to what constitutes a disorder (paedophilia and some PDs are the exemptions from memory). A lists are simply there to narrow down behaviours to tailor treatments. It's not such a big deal as an inclusion.


That could apply to anything though.

I could say I have a shopping addiction that significally impairs my standard of living but that would just be a problem associated with my depression, and not its own diagnosis.

Addictions are not relevant to depression, so no. Comorbidity. :P

What do you mean? Are you saying that a person with depression would be comorbid with their addiction or not?