now independent thinkers are considered diseased by psychiatry
 

take yr pills and shut it!

What pills?

A 'natural health' website citing only The Washington Post.

I'm skeptical that this article isn't exaggerating the normality of what these additions are referring to and I don't trust George Will, The Washing Post columnist, to speak authoritatively on the subject of psychiatry. I would like to see the peer-reviewership around the additions.

i love my doctor. he lobotomised my grandfather and electro shocked and tranquillized my dad into catatonia. now whenever i watch x factor and feel depressed i realise that there must be something wrong with ME and know that the good old doc can fix my broken brain with his ssri's. i slur my speech and am already showing signs of parkinsons from them but its all worth it because now i can sit in my dark bedroom slurping down 2 litre cokes and 12 packs of walkers and have x factor on and feel GREAT haha so GREAT SO HAPPY I ENJOY MY LIFE.

I'll give you a clue.
The DSM is published by the American Psychiatric Association. Check any online document that is issued by them like, for instance, the DSM protocols.

When I say "peer-reviewership" I mean the academic criticism of the DSM.

What's that got to do with it, may I ask? Essays and journals on the subject are also easily found online, if that's what you're saying.

dont make me envy you.

I really don't know how to answer this, precisely, because I figure that qualified criticism of the DSM has everything to do with a reliable criticism of the DSM.

So why the blog echo of a Washington Post article if you could easily find something more substantial than a conservative commentator with a 'for the children' emotional appeal?

adding more signs and symptoms to a diagnostic codebook is a step in the right direction, if you are, say, someone who is against pidgeonholing people's minds.

now, if you are a hyper-reactive layman-ninny, sure, I can see how that could be seen as troublesome.

let's hope for future editions of the DSM to include dx codes for "hyper-reactive layman-ninny", as I suspect that's one they neglected to include, but surely, deserves attention.

Because it's news. The opinion of who reported it I can take or leave. I agree the website has some articles on it that are plain loopy. The way they reported these news isn't totally hysterical though. So, how come you need the insightful views of an academic before you form an opinion on news that cross-referencing and research would establish as a true story?
Edit- pbradley

Really, I don't especially care about this particular article, nor even this particular topic, but the sensational title pressed all of my skeptical buttons.

And it's not that I need the insight of any academic but those of who are actively involved in the field of psychiatry today. As the DSM is a product of the profession, I would expect there to be professional voices that could both elucidate the additions as well as provide educated counter positions. Specialized language often gets confused by common interpretation which might produce news where there really isn't any.

my point is, the DSM is just the psyche-industry's companion to physical-medicine's standardized ICD code book. the more codes, the better.

here's a snippet:

Terrorism (injury) (by) (in) (involving) -laser(s) U01.8


chillax, go back to bed, enjoy sunday. tomorrow might bring terrorists with lasers.

More Pills!!!!!!!
Pills for everyone!

FROM THE CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION

Air

-blast in terrorism U01.2

Asphyxia, asphyxiation

-by
--chemical in terrorism U01.7
---in terrorism U01.3

Bayonet wound W26.-

-in
--terrorism U01.8

Crushed X59.-

-between objects (moving) (stationary and moving)
----in terrorism U01.1


Cut, cutting (any part of body) (by) (see also Contact, with, by object or machine) W49.-

-terrorism U01.8


Drowning (accidental) W74.-

-in
--terrorism U01.8


Exposure to

--in, of, on, starting in
---terrorism (by fire-producing device) U01.3

Injury, injured NEC

-by, caused by, from
--terrorism - see Terrorism
-due to
--terrorism - see Terrorism

Jumped, jumping

-from
----in terrorism U01.3

Suicide, suicidal (attempted) (by) X84.-
-in terrorism U01.4

etc etc etc


terrorist disease is....everywhere!!

If you think independently, others by extension must; when they can't, they call you the anomaly. Ha. I love it.

space echelon is all over you now

Dear Friend,

I am Echelon.

Love,

Node_00

more interested than that, there's an article in "the nation" about the forced psychiatric confinement of former sex offenders who have completed their sentences on the basis of "mental abnormality" defined very vague psychiatric "symptoms" such as "has no formal work history" or "is now married".

http://www.thenation.com/article/what-weve-become

There's nothing ambiguous about the issue: can future crimes be stemmed by the non-punitive confinement of pathological offenders? It's an ethical concern.

right, but so is "preemptive war" (an ethical concern). the thing is, this confinement is not "non-punitive" just because it's in a mental ward instead of a jail. we're talking about the involuntary confinement of a person who is married and eager to get out and rebuild his life. can you punish future crimes outside of a p k dick novel? it's a civil rights issue.

i just though to bring it up because the role psychiatry plays here, as prosecutor, judge and jury, and about the weak evidence the examiner presents to conclude "mental abnormality"-- to me, it's more significant than george will's take on the role of psychiatry in society-- while will talks about potential repercussions to the law, here we're seeing a concrete example of the legal implications of psychiatric diagnosis (and not a very thorough one to boot).

WAR IS PEACE
SLAVERY IS FREEDOM
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

sure is a little 1984 up in this fuckin' planet lately

What caught my attention about these news (yes pbradley - that's news) is how such a psychological profile could play a crucial part in any future criminal trials that would involve demonstrators in regard to certain issues.

i definitely have "oppositional defiant disorder", but my shrink(s0 don't treat it as a condition, rather as a personality trait that could be successfully channeled into productive pursuits, i.e., political agitator, ha haha.

socrates sure had that too (though he didn't curse people like i do, and he was way smarter), but he didn't fare so well, though he was old anyway when he was condemned.

the problem is when you try to stuff people into the same lifestyle-- if you're expected to go work in a factory or office then the "oppositional defiant disorder" can truly be a hurdle to survival (i've been fired from more jobs than i can count because i can't stand bosses). however, there are other ways to make a living.



look at the way the bastard laughs. he was arrested for speeding in his brand-new sports car and he didn't give 2 shits.

--

in the so-called "creative economies", eccentricity is a valuable asset. "i need 100 crazies by the end of the month!"

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/fea...5.florida.html

Yeah, I was also thinking about someone who works in a different department than mine and is closely associated with our union. He is experiencing problems that will probably lead to him being sacked or made redundant (his words) because he is used to the more full-on approach to not taking any shit that the unions have in France, where he is from. Basically his managers are subtly making his life difficult enough at work for him to feel stressed out all the time.

Personally, I'm disturbed by this precedent. But I'm also wary of leaving fires burning; we can only speculate and even then we're only underestimating. The only one who has the right to be modest is the victim.

i think in the anglosaxon model the workers are expected to be a lot more compliant than in france. strikes in america are considered a shame and a disgrace while in france they are a national sport. and didn't thatcher make her reputation by breaking a coalminer's strike? what's perfectly normal in one culture is a "disorder" in another. i tend to be "too loud" or rambunctious for certain types of people here in 'merica. don't know if you know the type, but they speak very softly and take turns to speak as if there was an invisible microphone, and they never get angry in public-- i like it when everyone talks at the same time and moves their hands for expression.

anyway, i hope your friend gets to go back to france-- the food is better, the people are nicer... but yes, his "difference" could be psychologized as a "condition". however there's a catch 22 to this-- if his issue could be categorized as a "psychological disorder", your friend could claim a "disability" & fuck the bosses back. sticking it to the boss is so so very sweet.

Sounds like valium by court order, for you.

I fit this pretty well, I think. Have a drug that can make us more hysterical? A this point, I figure it's become a war of the personalities.

I'd have no objection except moron DA's tag 'sex offender' on some guy taking a piss off his porch or some guy walking around in his kitchen naked while a nosy neighbor peeks in and then complains...I'm of the belief that rapists don't change

that's nothing. some army type once told me that i needed a lobotomy-- the poor bastard!


alcohol is supposed to uncork bottled up emotion and invite good cheer. not sure about being "hysterical". who'd want that?


war? who is at war?



the colombian is hotter, and a lot more fun

not sure this guy was a "rapist" proper, he was a street person who fucked other street people and gave them HIV, though, if I understand correctly, not on purpose.

the sex offender is the new terrorist. "let's get him before he gets us!" why don't they do the same with white collar criminals? we should have jailed BP executives last year by that measure.

Just ask OJ money talks if you got money you never have to worry about going to jail unless you're completely stupid and cocky beyond words again just ask OJ.

holy fuck i just noted that i meant to write "not on purpose" not "not in person". of course he gave HIV "in person". you can't get HIV from cybering.