Dear Maddie,
I am distressed.
Are these really disorders?
Sure, if it causes impairment or distress (or, you know, it’s illegal?). But what if the impairment and/or distress is not, so to speak, the fault of the alleged source… this is complicated.
For example: imagine you are a red head in a society that hates redheads. Obviously you might experience some significant distress and perhaps even impairment, but this is not because you are a red head, it is because your society has an issue with redheads. Do you have redhead disorder? No. Because disorders cannot solely represent an issue between the individual and the society. The DSM says so. But here we are...
So let’s imagine another scenario. You are raised a Catholic, but you have an inner conviction of being Buddhist. This might very well cause you some significant distress and impairment, to no one’s great surprise. But do you have religious disorder? Is that a disorder? And what if you take steps to become a Buddhist, or entertain the idea of becoming a Buddhist, and your society reacts negatively, or you worry that they will, and so that causes distress and/or impairment… is that a disorder?
I say no.
And I also say, for that matter, that psychomotor agitation is NOT necessarily indicative of inner tension attributed to feelings of anxiety.
These are the things I would like to say to my professor. These are the things I would like to discuss and explore with my cohort. But they don't want to hear it. Because we're memorizing material, not taking the time to challenge it. I understand that these are experts, that they have data, and that I know next to nothing... but that doesn't make them right and that doesn't mean I'm wrong. And of all the things it doesn't mean, it mostly doesn't mean that we shouldn't talk about it.
I miss you. I miss talking to you about things that matter.
A&F,
M
Are these really disorders?
Sure, if it causes impairment or distress (or, you know, it’s illegal?). But what if the impairment and/or distress is not, so to speak, the fault of the alleged source… this is complicated.
For example: imagine you are a red head in a society that hates redheads. Obviously you might experience some significant distress and perhaps even impairment, but this is not because you are a red head, it is because your society has an issue with redheads. Do you have redhead disorder? No. Because disorders cannot solely represent an issue between the individual and the society. The DSM says so. But here we are...
So let’s imagine another scenario. You are raised a Catholic, but you have an inner conviction of being Buddhist. This might very well cause you some significant distress and impairment, to no one’s great surprise. But do you have religious disorder? Is that a disorder? And what if you take steps to become a Buddhist, or entertain the idea of becoming a Buddhist, and your society reacts negatively, or you worry that they will, and so that causes distress and/or impairment… is that a disorder?
I say no.
And I also say, for that matter, that psychomotor agitation is NOT necessarily indicative of inner tension attributed to feelings of anxiety.
These are the things I would like to say to my professor. These are the things I would like to discuss and explore with my cohort. But they don't want to hear it. Because we're memorizing material, not taking the time to challenge it. I understand that these are experts, that they have data, and that I know next to nothing... but that doesn't make them right and that doesn't mean I'm wrong. And of all the things it doesn't mean, it mostly doesn't mean that we shouldn't talk about it.
I miss you. I miss talking to you about things that matter.
A&F,
M