Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => News Items => Topic started by: Inculcated on February 26, 2010, 11:48:35 PM
-
Okay, I'll play.
The disorder disorder- To be out of order with or question or defy your so ordered place in the universe disorder.
Factatious Disorder- To confront the dominating collective's constructs with truths independently derived from Facts not readily accepted by the general beliefs of those identified with said collective.
Tomatoform disorder- Those heirlooms are pretty, but difficult to cut no matter how you slice it.
Conversion disorder- A State of being psychically disconnected from the brain. Typically exhibited by psycho-diagnosticians
Adjustment Disorder- In severe cases this can be caused by the observing ego having (like Frod) grown “tired of being tormented to hell” (symptom overlap with 300.6)
Hyper religiosity- a belief that someone is making a list and checkin’ it twice while on stimulants or while in need of stimulants due to hyperactive disorder
Moodring disorders- When you bought one on a nostalgic impulse only to find it has turned your finger black and your brown eyes blue.
DisAsociative disorder- exhibited by persons with imaginary friends that typically do not play well with anyone that calls them names.
Depersonalization disorder- to be redefined as ennui or as a symptom of any tricyclic.
Dissociative Amnesia- Hey, what happens in ‘Vegas stays in ‘Vegas…right?
Borderline Personality Disorder- This patient challenges your patience and intellect…(d)efer immediately/pass that chart
Labeling disorder- A chronic ailment of pompous gas bags getting together with one another to define others as “the other” in one form or another, in reductive often pejorative clinical terms, in an effort to reassure themselves that they are beneficent and superior. This classification includes anyone narrow minded enough to assume that human behaviour could be subsumed within categories based on assessments designed and administered by people who interpret other people’s responses to inkblots.
Intermittent Explosive Disorder- Well then quit fucking with me!
-
You two are hilarious (Felice and Inculcated) why don't you start a comedy team.....lol
:shamrock: :shamrock: :shamrock: .......Danny..
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosenhan_experiment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosenhan_experiment)
The non-existent impostor experiment
For this experiment, Rosenhan used a well-known research and teaching hospital, whose staff had heard of the results of the initial study but claimed that similar errors could not be made at their institution. Rosenhan arranged with them that during a three month period, one or more pseudopatients would attempt to gain admission and the staff would rate every incoming patient as to the likelihood they were an impostor. Out of 193 patients, 41 were considered to be impostors and a further 42 were considered suspect. In reality, Rosenhan had sent no pseudopatients and all patients suspected as impostors by the hospital staff were genuine patients. This led to a conclusion that "any diagnostic process that lends itself too readily to massive errors of this sort cannot be a very reliable one". Studies by others found similarly problematic diagnostic results.
-
Until recently, I had never heard of the ICD (International Classification of Diseases). It was my assumption that the DSM was the international standard reference book for diagnosticians. Then I started reading about the World Health Organization’s ICD and learned that this is not the case. The DSM is the primary diagnostic system in the United States and just a few other countries. In most other countries around the world (particularly European countries), the DSM is used merely as an adjunct to the ICD diagnostic system, and sometimes the DSM is not employed at all. The two references have many and significant differences, such as their respective coding systems and disagreement in terms of which certain disorders belong on what axes. For instance: in ICD, "personality disorders" are placed on Axis 1; in DSM, they are Axis 2 diagnoses. However, there has been a lot of work done cooperatively by the American Psychological Association (APA) and the WHO to bring these two texts into concordance, and my questions are these: the ICD was first published before the DSM was. So, why did the American Psychological Association the create DSM in the first place? Why not, instead of trying to bring the DSM into concordance with the ICD and vice-versa, produce just one reference book that would set the international standard for diagnosis, epidemiology, and classification? It seems like in the longer run, such a move would end much confusion, and would be a generally simpler, yet more elegant and “streamlined” system for everyone concerned.
-
Edited: Wednesday, October 06, 2010
-
...the ICD was first published before the DSM was. So, why did the American Psychological Association the create DSM in the first place? Why not, instead of trying to bring the DSM into concordance with the ICD and vice-versa, produce just one reference book that would set the international standard for diagnosis, epidemiology, and classification? It seems like in the longer run, such a move would end much confusion, and would be a generally simpler, yet more elegant and "streamlined" system for everyone concerned.
Because the Americans (i.e., the APA, in this case) want(s) more control of it.
See also:
The Americanization of Mental Illness
viewtopic.php?f=32&t=29903 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=29903)[/list]
-
DSM-V is not all bad news. It turns the jumble of developmental syndromes for children into a single group of "autism spectrum disorders," which makes sense because previously, with Asperger's as a separate disease, it was like trying to draw lines in a bucket of water. But the basic problems of the previous DSM series are left untouched.
"...like trying to draw lines in a bucket of water." I like that.
-
DSM-V is not all bad news. It turns the jumble of developmental syndromes for children into a single group of "autism spectrum disorders," which makes sense because previously, with Asperger's as a separate disease, it was like trying to draw lines in a bucket of water. But the basic problems of the previous DSM series are left untouched.
Beg to differ on Shorter's "disease" characterization of Aspergers, however... "Disorder" is okay, but the most appropriate description would be "developmental syndrome," imo...
-
My Abnormal Psych professor told us the other day that the ASD are being moved from Axis 2 to Axis 1, and that "they" are changing the name of Borderline PD, and moving it to Axis 1 as well. In other words, these are being recategorized from "Developmental Disorders and Personality Disorders" to in the future being considered "Clinical Syndromes." That is to say, these are being medicalized. (cha-ching $$$)
Further, the Abnormal Psych prof told us just a few days ago that the APA (concurrent with the 2013 publication of DSM-V) is also proposing to change the criteria by which one can become qualified to diagnose mental health clients, as well as the training procedures through which a person can be qualified to make such diagnoses. After May of 2013, according to my prof, it may very well come to pass that anybody who completes a two-to-four year training program (even somebody without an undergraduate degree) can become qualified to diagnose clients out of the newly revised DSM. Unbelievable.
Yeah, I think that DSM is little more than a hunk of toilet paper in fancy packaging too. But, I also say that even though it is for the most part lacking in validity, it's still better than nothing, and in some senses is at least an improvement upon the systems of old. Just fifty short years ago I would likely have been made (on the orders of a doctor and as part of some "medical treatment" for relief of my depression) to inhale carbon monoxide until I passed out and began convulsing, or given a deliberate overdose of insulin, or maybe I would have been lobotomoized and put in some back ward. We are making progress, albeit slowly. This is my opinion.
-
My Abnormal Psych professor told us the other day that the ASD are being moved from Axis 2 to Axis 1, and that "they" are changing the name of Borderline PD, and moving it to Axis 1 as well. In other words, these are being recategorized from "Developmental Disorders and Personality Disorders" to in the future being considered "Clinical Syndromes." That is to say, these are being medicalized. (cha-ching $$$)
Further, the Abnormal Psych prof told us just a few days ago that the APA (concurrent with the 2013 publication of DSM-V) is also proposing to change the criteria by which one can become qualified to diagnose mental health clients, as well as the training procedures through which a person can be qualified to make such diagnoses. After May of 2013, according to my prof, it may very well come to pass that anybody who completes a two-to-four year training program (even somebody without an undergraduate degree) can become qualified to diagnose clients out of the newly revised DSM. Unbelievable.
Geez Louise! Gotta wonder just what kind of "professional standards" someone sans undergraduate degree but with a "a two-to-four year training program" under their belt ... feels beholden to. And just who is in charge of these training programs?
-
This has only been proposed (so I am told), and is nothing that has been set in stone. Don't anybody get their panties in a wad over it. Nothing will be decided upon and implemented until over three years from now.
-
Trying to diagnose myself but I have a problem, to many to choose from. I seem to be able to identify with all. I know I have "CIPD", Collective Integration Personality Disorder. I collect personality disorders and integrate them. Ya know like a goulash, everything left around the kitchen dumped into the pot with some noodles. Looks horrible but tastes great. At least that's what my mom called her Hungarian Goulash.
viewtopic.php?f=49&t=29966&start=15 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=29966&start=15)
http://www.dsm5.org/ProposedRevisions/P ... rders.aspx (http://www.dsm5.org/ProposedRevisions/Pages/PersonalityandPersonalityDisorders.aspx)
DSM-IV Disorders Being Recommended for Reformulation
301.0 Paranoid Personality Disorder
301.20 Schizoid Personality Disorder
301.22 Schizotypal Personality Disorder
301.7 Antisocial Personality Disorder
301.83 Borderline Personality Disorder
301.50 Histrionic Personality Disorder
301.81 Narcissistic Personality Disorder
301.82 Avoidant Personality Disorder
301.6 Dependent Personality Disorder
301.4 Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder
301.9 Personality Disorder Not Otherwise Specified
Appendix B Diagnosis: Depressive Personality Disorder
Appendix B Diagnosis: Passive-Aggressive (Negativistic) Personality Disorder
General Diagnostic Criteria for Personality Disorder
:shamrock: :shamrock:
Danny.......
-
Intermittent Visual Nose Picking Disorder (IVNPD)
IVNPD is primarily characterized by unpredictable episodes or experiences compromised by the imagined perception of lights, patterns or objects in the visual cortex during intense nose picking excavations.
Source: Page 233 of the DSM-IV-FE*
This is hilarious, or would be if the rest of the damn thing weren't so, well, creepy. I was wondering about the above disorder, though--what if the episodes can be linked to mornings after a night of insufflated drug abuse, such as snorting cocaine, heroin, xanax, or other drugs, particularly those that leave significant mucus encrustation? Would this factor in, or is a new diagnosis indicated?
-
Edited: Wednesday, October 06, 2010
-
...the ICD was first published before the DSM was. So, why did the American Psychological Association the create DSM in the first place? Why not, instead of trying to bring the DSM into concordance with the ICD and vice-versa, produce just one reference book that would set the international standard for diagnosis, epidemiology, and classification? It seems like in the longer run, such a move would end much confusion, and would be a generally simpler, yet more elegant and "streamlined" system for everyone concerned.
Because the Americans (i.e., the APA, in this case) want(s) more control of it.
See also:
The Americanization of Mental Illness
viewtopic.php?f=32&t=29903 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=29903)[/list]
The other day I asked my Abnormal Psych professor (himself a practicing psychiatrist) this very question, the one about why the DSM is used over the ICD in this country, even though the ICD is known internationally to be both more reliable and valid than the DSM. It was during his office hours, when it was just he and I. His is a DSM-based class. We have to study that stuff assiduously.
In answering my question, he kind of smirked and said, "For the same reason that the rest of the world uses the metric system and we don't. We're Americans, and we just have to do things differently, and somehow need to think that we're more advanced than everybody else. And of course, the insurance companies have to get their piece."
So even he agreed that the supremacy of the DSM is a myth (even as he is teaching it) and that Big Pharm is a scam, but also said basically that clinicians are forced to do the best they can with what they've got. I respect him for his candor.
-
Your psych professor knows what he is talking about. He condensed my thoughts exactly into 3 sentences. I would have worded it just a little differently and said: “….. those dammed heartless Insurance companies…”
...
-
Your psych professor knows what he is talking about. He condensed my thoughts exactly into 3 sentences. I would have worded it just a little differently and said: “….. those dammed heartless Insurance companies…”
A serious, sober, and somewhat eccentric fellow, he sure as hell knows what he is talking about. After about two weeks into the semester, he told us in class: "Look, I could take anybody in the room and if you gave me forty-eight hours, I could make you psychotic. This course should give you a whole new understanding of the word 'pathology' and should make you wary of ever pathologizing mental disorders." That struck me as a revelation.
Also, the man is from NYC and knew a thing or two about DAYTOP and Synanon, Dederich, Casriel, and the whole bunch. He called DAYTOP "the East Coast version of Synanon" and agreed with me that it was little more than a personality-driven sobriety cult and that B-mod and attack therapy practices are highly unethical, especially when used on children. I was surprised that he knew about DAYTOP in such detail. He knew about Straight and Newton, even, too.
-
This is almost to gross to post, but speaking of wariness against pathologizing mental disorders…
Intermittent Visual Nose Picking Disorder (IVNPD)
IVNPD is primarily characterized by unpredictable episodes or experiences compromised by the imagined perception of lights, patterns or objects in the visual cortex during intense nose picking excavations.
Source: Page 233 of the DSM-IV-FE*
This is hilarious, or would be if the rest of the damn thing weren't so, well, creepy. I was wondering about the above disorder, though--what if the episodes can be linked to mornings after a night of insufflated drug abuse, such as snorting cocaine, heroin, xanax, or other drugs, particularly those that leave significant mucus encrustation? Would this factor in, or is a new diagnosis indicated?
There’s always the possibility of a dual diagnosis. The comorbidity of both substance abuse problems as well as IVNPD is difficult to parse out and would of course require a lengthy stay at SIBS (http://http://www.fornits.com/SIBS/) to root out the source of the primary symptoms.
-
Edited above post a little. Please look it over for his knowledge of DAYTOP.
-
...A serious, sober, and somewhat eccentric fellow, he sure as hell knows what he is talking about. After about two weeks into the semester, he told us in class: "Look, I could take anybody in the room and if you gave me forty-eight hours, I could make you psychotic. This course should give you a whole new understanding of the word 'pathology' and should make you wary of ever pathologizing mental disorders." That struck me as a revelation.
Also, the man is from NYC and knew a thing or two about DAYTOP and Synanon, Dederich, Casriel, and the whole bunch. He called DAYTOP "the East Coast version of Synanon" and agreed with me that it was little more than a personality-driven sobriety cult and that B-mod and attack therapy practices are highly unethical, especially when used on children. I was surprised that he knew about DAYTOP in such detail. He knew about Straight and Newton, even, too.
The Prof said: "Look, I could take anybody in the room and if you gave me forty-eight hours, I could make you psychotic."
Uh hunh, at Daytop that was called a Marathon group. :poison: