Fri May 11, 2012, 04:55 PM
alp227 (20,404 posts)
Addiction Diagnoses May Rise Under Guideline Changes
Source: NYT
In what could prove to be one of their most far-reaching decisions, psychiatrists and other specialists who are rewriting the manual that serves as the nation’s arbiter of mental illness have agreed to revise the definition of addiction, which could result in millions more people being diagnosed as addicts and pose huge consequences for health insurers and taxpayers. The revision to the manual, known as the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or D.S.M., would expand the list of recognized symptoms for drug and alcohol addiction, while also reducing the number of symptoms required for a diagnosis, according to proposed changes posted on the Web site of the American Psychiatric Association, which produces the book. In addition, the manual for the first time would include gambling as an addiction, and it might introduce a catchall category — “behavioral addiction — not otherwise specified” — that some public health experts warn would be too readily used by doctors, despite a dearth of research, to diagnose addictions to shopping, sex, Internet use or playing video games. Part medical guidebook, part legal reference, the manual has long been embraced by government and industry. It dictates whether insurers, including Medicare and Medicaid, will pay for treatment, and whether schools will expand financing for certain special-education services. Courts use it to assess whether a criminal defendant is mentally impaired, and pharmaceutical companies rely on it to guide their research. Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/12/us/dsm-revisions-may-sharply-increase-addiction-diagnoses.html?pagewanted=all
|
11 replies, 2394 views
| Author | Time | Post | |
| alp227 | May 2012 | OP | |
| JDPriestly | May 2012 | #1 | |
| MichiganVote | May 2012 | #2 | |
| loudsue | May 2012 | #3 | |
| hifiguy | May 2012 | #4 | |
| boppers | May 2012 | #7 | |
| TygrBright | May 2012 | #5 | |
| boppers | May 2012 | #8 | |
| chill_wind | May 2012 | #6 | |
| sendero | May 2012 | #9 | |
| chill_wind | May 2012 | #10 | |
| hedgehog | May 2012 | #11 |
Response to alp227 (Original post)
Fri May 11, 2012, 05:10 PM
JDPriestly (37,714 posts)
1. I think that new methods will be found (are being found)
|
to treat some of these addictions and that within ten years, this will not be the problem it is today.
We are learning so much about how the brain and mind function and how we can reprogram ourselves that broadening the definition of addiction will be helpful to many people. And with that, I sign off DU and go do something else. DU can be addictive. We wouldn't want that, would we? |
Response to alp227 (Original post)
Fri May 11, 2012, 06:25 PM
MichiganVote (18,957 posts)
2. One error in the article: Schools do not depend solely on medical/mental health Dx
|
for the provision of Special Education services. Per the eligibility regulations, multiple sources of information are required for the identification / eligibility of kids.
AND for any Doctors reading this: Quit writing "special education" on your prescription pads. You look like idiots. |
Response to alp227 (Original post)
Fri May 11, 2012, 09:28 PM
loudsue (12,382 posts)
3. They REALLY need to include teapartiers and neonazis as mentally impaired
|
and hopefully we could find a way to treat them and so they will no longer be a threat to society.
|
Response to alp227 (Original post)
Fri May 11, 2012, 09:29 PM
hifiguy (13,029 posts)
4. NOT a good idea.
|
Turning fairly normal behaviors into pathologies is a bad thing, and I say that as someone dx'd on the autism spectrum. Sometimes people are just stupid and self-destructive. This is ultimately just another way to line the pockets of Big Pharma.
|
Response to hifiguy (Reply #4)
Sat May 12, 2012, 05:59 AM
boppers (16,588 posts)
7. "Normal" behaviors that are socially dangerous is a bad thing.
|
Since we're both on the ASD scale, I would posit the following:
1. Obsession with cultivating information about a topic is not an addiction (though quite common in ASD). 2. Said Obsession leading to impairment in general social functioning is a bad thing. 3. Dx of said obsession as "addiction" rather than another Dx is problematic. So, let us "play with fire", so to speak (I hope you can follow that). Assume somebody with ASD is tuned into beer varieties. Is the fact that they think about beer constantly a problem? Not really. Thinking isn't an impairment. If they think about, and use beer, to the detriment of existing relationships, a problem? Possibly. If they are considered "addicted" to beer, just because they think about it so much, a problem? Definitely. I would say the problem is not that "Turning fairly normal behaviors into pathologies" is not the problem, but mis-diagnosis is the problem. Obsession is not addiction. |
Response to alp227 (Original post)
Fri May 11, 2012, 09:47 PM
TygrBright (12,812 posts)
5. "Joe, we're here to Intervene on your Behavioral Addiction Not Otherwise Specified..."
|
"Wait, what??!? What addiction?"
"How do we know? It hasn't been specified." ironically, Bright |
Response to TygrBright (Reply #5)
Sat May 12, 2012, 06:03 AM
boppers (16,588 posts)
8. Just in case you are being clever...
|
...that's really a "catch-all" category.
Say, for example, you or I were addicted to stealing panties from public laundromats, or something similar, that isn't easily "coded" for (and thus, could not be treated, and billed, for). Maybe it's you, or I, who have an addiction for putting Barbies in GI Joe boxes. Whatever. The vague category allows for unusual behaviors that are not prevalent enough to warrant their own categories. |
Response to alp227 (Original post)
Sat May 12, 2012, 12:33 AM
chill_wind (13,475 posts)
6. DSM-5- "An inexplicably closed and secretive process"
|
Beginning with the fact that the task force overseeing the development of DSM-5 consists of only 27 members.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSM-5 From what I can tell, the new DSM-5 has been an incredibly controversial process. Many papers, letters, critiques can be seen at http://www.psychiatrictimes.com (resource site for physicians and other MH professionals) Just a few of many criticisms: (1) Why introduce Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder when it has been studied by only one research team for only six years and risks further encouraging the inappropriate use of antipsychotic drugs for kids with temper tantrums? much more at Wonderful News: DSM-5 Finally Begins Its Belated And Necessary Retreat By Allen Frances, MD | May 4, 2012 http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/blog/frances/content/article/10168/2068571 |
Response to alp227 (Original post)
Sat May 12, 2012, 06:54 AM
sendero (25,000 posts)
9. Well well..
|
.. if you classify behaviors exhibited by a large proportion of the population as "illness" it sure creates a lot of new "patients".
What a pantload psychiatry has become. |
Response to sendero (Reply #9)
Sat May 12, 2012, 09:40 AM
chill_wind (13,475 posts)
10. An APA Cash Cow
|
Is DSM 5 A Public Trust Or An APA Cash Cow?
Commercialism And Censorship Trump Concern For Quality Published on January 3, 2012 by Allen J. Frances, M.D. in DSM5 in Distress http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/dsm5-in-distress/201201/is-dsm-5-public-trust-or-apa-cash-cow ("Allen Frances, M.D., was chair of the DSM-IV Task Force and of the department of psychiatry at Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC. He is currently professor emeritus at Duke.") |
Response to alp227 (Original post)
Sat May 12, 2012, 02:43 PM
hedgehog (30,378 posts)

