mental disorder

[scarletghoul]

What is defined as a 'mental disorder' ? Is it necessarily a debilitating thing, or just an abnormality ? Is the distinction cultural or neurological ? etc.

I wonder about this because Aspergers and Autism are generally considered disorders, yet homosexuality for example isn't (though i think in some countries and times it was/is). They are both unusual and people who have them face a disadvantage and discrimination because the system is in favour of normal people, so why is one a mental disorder and the other isn't ? (i know there is no one determined reason for homosexuality and that it may be biological not just mental, but my point is about the term 'disorder')

Someone with Aspergers will often not fit in to society, but history has shown that they can be capable of some great things when the conditions are right (theory of relativity, Pokemon, etc). Similarly, homosexual people do not quite fit in because society is built around heterosexual norms.

These are just two obvious examples, but im talking about the idea of 'mental disorder' in general. Right now my view is this- homosexuality and Asperger's are both 'disorders' because they differ from the dominant 'mental order'. Our long term task should be a society that is inclusive of all mental types, including gays and aspies.

But this is in Learning because I don't know a lot about mental classifications etc, so please contribute

[Quail]

I think that what defines something as a "disorder" as opposed to just a quirk is the effect it has on someone's life. If someone's thought patterns or behaviour are having a debilitating effect on their everyday functioning, then it would stop being normal and become a disorder. For example, most people feel a bit anxious from time to time; it's natural. However if the anxiety got to the point where someone couldn't leave the house without having anxiety attacks, their life would be greatly affected so they could be diagnosed with an anxiety disorder.

Something like sexuality isn't a disorder because the negative impact it may have on someone's life doesn't come from within. It comes from a society that isn't accepting of people who don't conform.

[ed miliband]

I haven't a clue, but I love this paragraph:


Someone with Aspergers will often not fit in to society, but history has shown that they can be capable of some great things when the conditions are right (theory of relativity, Pokemon, etc). Similarly, homosexual people do not quite fit in because society is built around heterosexual norms.:lol:

I have a question for those with Asperger's Syndrome / autism anyway. When I was in primary school there was this lad who suffered from AS and he was crippled with depression. I didn't really understand the concept of depression then, but I remember seeing him cowering in the corner crying and I was quite disturbed by it. He used to tell himself off for his behaviour, and it was as if he understood what he was doing wasn't considered socially normal but had no way of stopping it. So basically, do people with AS / autism find there is a gulf between their identity as they understand it and their identity as neurotypical people understand it? ...if any of that makes sense.

[blake 3:17]

These are just two obvious examples, but im talking about the idea of 'mental disorder' in general. Right now my view is this- homosexuality and Asperger's are both 'disorders' because they differ from the dominant 'mental order'. Our long term task should be a society that is inclusive of all mental types, including gays and aspies.

But this is in Learning because I don't know a lot about mental classifications etc, so please contribute

I'm not an expert on medical history, but diseases, syndromes, disorders all have different meanings and those meanings have changed over time.

You're probably thinking of the DSM -- the Holy Scripture of American Pyschiatry. wikiblah here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diagnostic_and_Statistical_Manual_of_Mental_Disord ers

The broad cultural, the immediate social and the physical/material state of the brain and nervous system all play roles. This is a huge question with no final answers.

PM if you want --

[red cat]

What is defined as a 'mental disorder' ? Is it necessarily a debilitating thing, or just an abnormality ? Is the distinction cultural or neurological ? etc.

I wonder about this because Aspergers and Autism are generally considered disorders, yet homosexuality for example isn't (though i think in some countries and times it was/is). They are both unusual and people who have them face a disadvantage and discrimination because the system is in favour of normal people, so why is one a mental disorder and the other isn't ? (i know there is no one determined reason for homosexuality and that it may be biological not just mental, but my point is about the term 'disorder')

Someone with Aspergers will often not fit in to society, but history has shown that they can be capable of some great things when the conditions are right (theory of relativity, Pokemon, etc). Similarly, homosexual people do not quite fit in because society is built around heterosexual norms.

These are just two obvious examples, but im talking about the idea of 'mental disorder' in general. Right now my view is this- homosexuality and Asperger's are both 'disorders' because they differ from the dominant 'mental order'. Our long term task should be a society that is inclusive of all mental types, including gays and aspies.

But this is in Learning because I don't know a lot about mental classifications etc, so please contribute

When communists use these terms, it has a lot to do with their stand on several issues of struggle. Differing from the dominant order should not be regarded as disorder, as it might lead to supporting the suppression of certain social minorities. Also, let us not forget that the dominant order itself is an average over many deviations, and if we stick to strict definitions, we might not get any order that forms a majority over all others.

In my opinion, a mental disorder should be considered as something that adversely affects a person's ability to interact with the rest of the society, and intellectually contribute to the society, to a great extent. This means homosexuality or bisexuality are not mental disorders, nor is Aspergers at that stage where it helps someone to make great discoveries.

[Black Sheep]

Religion is one.

[Hoipolloi Cassidy]

When communists use these terms, it has a lot to do with their stand on several issues of struggle. Differing from the dominant order should not be regarded as disorder, as it might lead to supporting the suppression of certain social minorities.


Gag...

Look, here's a bit of the political background:

Many of the second generation of psychoanalysts had been Army psychiatrists in WWI. They were confronted with a very basic problem: dealing with shell-shocked soldiers whose "cure" would mean they were ready to be sent back to the front. Wagner-Jauregg, the Austrian shrink who pioneered this in WWI, had the great idea that if you sent enough electric juice into the soldier's body, that would cure him - or kill him,of course. WJ won the Nobel, though not for this.

This is the "adjustment" theory of psychoanalysis and psychiatry, and it's only prevalent in America and among certain Stalinists and Left-Positivists (same difference.) Naturally,DSM is a great little tool for those who think all you need to do is identify the "sickness" and press the button at the back of the dude's head - or maybe pull the switch, and presto: New Soviet/Capitalist Citizen. But it really doesn't have to be used that way. The other approach is simply to ask what's going to make the patient suffer least. If it's adjustment,fine. If it's a pill, that's fine, too. If it's making Revolution, I say go for it. That's what a lot of shrinks would say, and have said.

[Antifa94]

sam, you're exactly right- the majority of so called disorders simply mark behavior that differs from bourgeois society and is viewed as eccentric and dangerous. At the same time, some with profound learning disabilities, or, for instance, is born with down syndrome actually has a neurological condition.

[Quail]

sam, you're exactly right- the majority of so called disorders simply mark behavior that differs from bourgeois society and is viewed as eccentric and dangerous. At the same time, some with profound learning disabilities, or, for instance, is born with down syndrome actually has a neurological condition.
Are you refering to personality disorders?

[Antifa94]

somewhat...also Asperger's, that is, it isn't really a neurological malfunction, rather, it's society's classification of one that can't "fit in".

[DarkNation]

I haven't a clue, but I love this paragraph:

:lol:

I have a question for those with Asperger's Syndrome / autism anyway. When I was in primary school there was this lad who suffered from AS and he was crippled with depression. I didn't really understand the concept of depression then, but I remember seeing him cowering in the corner crying and I was quite disturbed by it. He used to tell himself off for his behaviour, and it was as if he understood what he was doing wasn't considered socially normal but had no way of stopping it. So basically, do people with AS / autism find there is a gulf between their identity as they understand it and their identity as neurotypical people understand it? ...if any of that makes sense.

I have Aspergers syndrome, but I don't think I understand my identity any differently than neurotypical people. It's basically just a different form of personality, but it often does go along with depression.

[28350]

I'm not an expert on medical history, but diseases, syndromes, disorders all have different meanings and those meanings have changed over time.

You're probably thinking of the DSM -- the Holy Scripture of American Pyschiatry. wikiblah here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diagnostic_and_Statistical_Manual_of_Mental_Disord ers


The DSM has very dry definitions, because it goes out of its way to be atheoretical. So, sure, some things will be classified as disorders, but that doesn't mean much beyond leaving space for a description in the DSM.

[NGNM85]

What is defined as a 'mental disorder' ? Is it necessarily a debilitating thing, or just an abnormality ? Is the distinction cultural or neurological ? etc.

I wonder about this because Aspergers and Autism are generally considered disorders, yet homosexuality for example isn't (though i think in some countries and times it was/is). They are both unusual and people who have them face a disadvantage and discrimination because the system is in favour of normal people, so why is one a mental disorder and the other isn't ? (i know there is no one determined reason for homosexuality and that it may be biological not just mental, but my point is about the term 'disorder')

Someone with Aspergers will often not fit in to society, but history has shown that they can be capable of some great things when the conditions are right (theory of relativity, Pokemon, etc). Similarly, homosexual people do not quite fit in because society is built around heterosexual norms.

These are just two obvious examples, but im talking about the idea of 'mental disorder' in general. Right now my view is this- homosexuality and Asperger's are both 'disorders' because they differ from the dominant 'mental order'. Our long term task should be a society that is inclusive of all mental types, including gays and aspies.

But this is in Learning because I don't know a lot about mental classifications etc, so please contribute

Homosexuality is absolutely biologically determined. It is not a pathology because pathologies express themselves in identical ways and arise from predictable causes. It takes a certain set of circumstances to produce obsessive-compulsive disorder, or Sociopathy, and these disorders manifest themselves in a uniform and predictable manner. Homosexuality shows no preference for race, class, upbringing, or character traits. That it is not the norm for most homo sapiens is not to say that it is a disorder. There is nothing inherently debilitating about homosexuality. In fact, it may have unforeseen evolutionary benefits.

Autism and Aspergers, which is a type of Autism, are developmental disorders that arise from abnormalities in brain development.

'Mental disorder' is kind of broad and vague. There are several types of mental illnesses, which can first be divided into two broad categories; psychoses and neurosis.

Neurosis are mental illness that range from minor idiosyncrasies to severely debilitating, but the patient can still perceive reality, they are not delusional, and they don’t suffer from hallucinations. Psychotics have lost their connection with reality, they perceive things that are not real, they have bizarre beliefs that have no relation to reality. Under Neurosis we could file things like Mood Disorders, which includes Depressive disorders; Manic Depression, Seasonal Affective Disorder (AKA ‘SAD’), (Chronic)Depression, Dysthymia, what’s sometimes called ‘Double Depression.’ There are also Personality Disorders, or character disorders, which are more serious, like Bipolar, Schizotypal, Paranoiac, Avoidant, Obsessive Personality disorder, etc. There’s also Obsessive-compulsive disorder, and other Anxiety disorders like extreme Phobias, etc. Sociopathy is also a (severe) type of neurosis, which isn’t included in the present DSM, but it might be in the next edition.

Psychotic patients include Schizophrenics, which is not only a mental illness but an organic brain disease, the center ventricles in the brain are significantly enlarged, neural pathways shut down, and the disease can actually destroy gray matter. There can be other causes for psychoses, like drug overdoses, drug abuse, extreme sleep deprivation, brain injury or tumors, and individuals with PTSD can have a psychotic break if they are substantially stressed.

[Jalapeno Enema]

What is defined as a 'mental disorder' ? Is it necessarily a debilitating thing, or just an abnormality ? Is the distinction cultural or neurological ? etc.

From Abnormal Psychology: Sixth Edition by Ronald J. Comer (isbn=071676928X):

Although their general goals are similar to those of other scientific professionals, clinical scientists and practitioners face problems that make their work especially difficult. One of the most troubling is that psychological abnormality is very hard to define. . .

. . .Although many definitions of abnormality have been proposed over the years, none is universally accepted (Maddux & Winstead, 2005). Still, most of the definitions have certain features in common, often cited "the four D's": deviance, distress, dysfunction, and danger. That is, patterns of psychological abnormality are typically deviant (different, extreme, unusual, perhaps even bizzare); distressing (unpleasant and upsetting to the person); dysfunctional (interfering with the person's ability to conduct daily activities in a constructive way); and possibly dangerous. These criteria offer a useful starting point from which to explore the phenomena of psychological abnormality. . .


I wonder about this because Aspergers and Autism are generally considered disorders, yet homosexuality for example isn't (though i think in some countries and times it was/is).

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) is the primary diagnostic source used by the American Psychiatric Association (APA). Originally, in 1952, the DSM did categorize homosexuality as a sexual/ gender identity disorder. Largely thanks to Alfred Kinsey, however, the categorization of homosexuality as a mental disorder has since been attributed as a cultural bias, and therefore unfounded. The current edition, DSM-IV-TR, published in 2000, categorizes homosexuality as a healthy, normal psychological variant to heterosexuality.


They are both unusual and people who have them face a disadvantage and discrimination because the system is in favour of normal people, so why is one a mental disorder and the other isn't ? (i know there is no one determined reason for homosexuality and that it may be biological not just mental, but my point is about the term 'disorder')

There has always been a level of subjectivity in psychiatric medicine. Where psychiatric professionals attempt to draw the line between "abnormal" and "eccentric" (deviant behavior, but not abnormal), however, is generally dictated by potential danger to self/others, and when the thought process disrupts every day living.

In a study by Weeks & James, 1995, David Weeks pinpointed 15 characteristics common to eccentric behavior; nonconformity, creativity, strong sense of curiosity, idealism, a positive obsession with hobbies, lifelong self awareness of being different, high intelligence, extroversion, non-competitiveness, atypical eating and living habits, disinterest in others' opinions or company, mischievous sense of humor, non-marriage, eldest or only child, poor spelling skills.

Eccentrics are not seen as psychologically abnormal, however; the thought processes are not severely disrupted, and therefore do not leave them dysfunctional. Indeed, most eccentrics actually exhibit fewer emotional problems then the general population.

In your example, homosexuality is no longer deemed a sexual disorder because
1. Consensual homosexual behavior is harmless to all parties involved
2. Homosexual behavior in itself does not cause emotional distress (although in many cases societal reactions to homosexual behavior can cause distress, however this point is creeping into sociology, a study that I have no background in.)


Someone with Aspergers will often not fit in to society, but history has shown that they can be capable of some great things when the conditions are right (theory of relativity, Pokemon, etc). Similarly, homosexual people do not quite fit in because society is built around heterosexual norms.

Psychiatric medicine does not imply that an individual with a psychiatric disorder is not capable of "great things". As you pointed out, throughout history savants, who often are diagnosed autistic, preform significant accomplishments.

Again, homosexual discrimination is a cultural bias, and therefore a sociological problem rather then a psychological disorder.


These are just two obvious examples, but im talking about the idea of 'mental disorder' in general. Right now my view is this- homosexuality and Asperger's are both 'disorders' because they differ from the dominant 'mental order'. Our long term task should be a society that is inclusive of all mental types, including gays and aspies.

I agree, society should strive to be inclusive of all "mental types". The social norms and mores need major attitude adjustment from current biases. I'm cautiously optimistic for the future; since 1842 there has been significant psychiatric advancement.

Looking at the current systems, it's easy to criticize (rightfully so), but the roots of many of these problems are external. Public views on psychology ("it's in your head", "head-shrinkers and quacks") are still often poor, and unfounded pseudo-science easily infiltrates psychology (there is actually a contemporary psychiatric trephination movement, for example.)

Psychiatric medicine in better then it was, however. Keep in mind that merely 60 years ago lobotomy was standard procedure.

Hopefully, society will reach a point where going to see a psychologist is perceived as no different then seeing a medical doctor (a specialist in mental medicine, as it were), and seeking help for emotional distress is perceived no less legitimate then seeking medical advice for physical health problems.

That said, there are cases, and will be cases where certain individuals will have to be separated from the general population for treatment (idealistically re-introduced to the general population after they are no longer a threat to public safety). These would include antisocial (from DSM-IV: "a pervasive pattern of disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others that begins in childhood or early adolescence and continues into adulthood"; often confused among laypeople with asocial) or sociopathic patients.


But this is in Learning because I don't know a lot about mental classifications etc, so please contribute
Hope I could have been of some help.

[blake 3:17]

Homosexuality is absolutely biologically determined.

I'm so old that I was in with the crew of queer liberationists who argued it wasn't bio-determined.


It's basically just a different form of personality, but it often does go along with depression. Asperger's is a hard one. I think there's more awareness these days, but that doesn't stop the every day bullying.


I agree, society should strive to be inclusive of all "mental types". The social norms and mores need major attitude adjustment from current biases. I'm cautiously optimistic for the future; since 1842 there has been significant psychiatric advancement.

Looking at the current systems, it's easy to criticize (rightfully so), but the roots of many of these problems are external. Public views on psychology ("it's in your head", "head-shrinkers and quacks") are still often poor, and unfounded pseudo-science easily infiltrates psychology (there is actually a contemporary psychiatric trephination movement, for example.)

Psychiatric medicine in better then it was, however. Keep in mind that merely 60 years ago lobotomy was standard procedure.


There've been some technical adavances with some medications or medications with less side effects. Aside from particular awareness campaigns I'm not sure that things are so much better.