Normality Is an Endangered Species: Psychiatric Fa
In posting this blog, I wish to state that I believe that there are genuine cases that need psychiatric intervention but in a lot of instances, what are termed “mental ilnesses” are “manufactured” by the psychiatric profession and Big Pharma.Normality Is an Endangered Species: Psychiatric Fads and Overdiagnosis
Fads in psychiatric diagnosis come and go and have been with us as long as there has been psychiatry. The fads meet a deeply felt need to explain, or at least to label, what would otherwise be unexplainable human suffering and deviance. In recent years the pace has picked up and false “epidemics” have come in bunches involving an ever-increasing proportion of the population. We are now in the midst of at least 3 such epidemics—of autism, attention deficit, and childhood bipolar disorder. And unless it comes to its senses, DSM-5 threatens to provoke several more (hypersexuality, binge eating, mixed anxiety depression, minor neurocognitive, and others).
Fads punctuate what has become a basic background of overdiagnosis. Normality is an endangered species. The NIMH estimates that, in any given year, 25 percent of the population (that’s almost 60 million people) has a diagnosable mental disorder. A prospective study found that, by age thirty-two, 50 percent of the general population had qualified for an anxiety disorder, 40 percent for depression, and 30 percent for alcohol abuse or dependence. Imagine what the rates will be like by the time these people hit fifty, or sixty-five, or eighty. In this brave new world of psychiatric overdiagnosis, will anyone get through life without a mental disorder?
What accounts for the recent upsurge in diagnosis? I feel quite confident we can’t blame it on our brains. Human physiology and human nature change slowly if at all. Could it be that the surge in mental disorders is caused by our stressful society? I think not. There is no particular reason to believe that life is any harder now than it has always been—more likely we are the most pampered and protected generation ever to face its inevitable challenges. It is also tempting to find environmental (eg toxins) or iatrogenic causes (eg vaccinations), but there is no credible evidence supporting either of these. There is really only one viable environmental candidate to explain the growth of mental disorder—the widespread recreational use of psychotropic substances. But this cannot account for the extent of the “epidemics," particularly since most have centered on children.
No. The “epidemics” in psychiatry are caused by changing diagnostic fashions—the people don’t change, the labels do. There are no objective tests in psychiatry—no X-ray, laboratory, or exam that says definitively that someone does or does not have a mental disorder. What is diagnosed as mental disorder is very sensitive to professional and social contextual forces. Rates of disorder rise easily because mental disorder has such fluid boundaries with normality.
Note:
DSM - Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
published by the American Psychiatric Association (APA)
(Cont'd in Comments Section)
Comments (5)
The drug companies must love the psychiatric profession.
There was a interview on NPR (National Public Radio) where the government wants your family doctor to ask questions of their patients to determine if they are mentally ill or not. As far as I know, they don't have to be some sort of trained psychologist or anything. It sounded like pregnant women were going to be the main patients to focus on.
And yes, if deemed necessary, medication was to be prescribed.
You may be interested in the work of Pat Bracken and Peter Breggin, both psychiatrists and members of the Critical Psychiatry Network.
I heard an interview by Pat Bracken lately, and he is very condemning of big pharma role in 'inventing' mental illnesses to boost their profits.
It was scary seeing the power they have, especially in the USA. If they had their way, every single emotion would be considered a mental illness and would be medicated.
Sadness, anger, even happiness would all be medicated.
Re your comment:
“There is no formula, or measurement for a mental disorder.”
As stated in the article:
"There are no objective tests in psychiatry—no X-ray, laboratory, or exam that says definitively that someone does or does not have a mental disorder. What is diagnosed as mental disorder is very sensitive to professional and social contextual forces."
Also, even with the DSM which attempts to list “symptoms” of “mental illnesses”, in some cases, it may simply be a matter of interpretation by various psychiatrists.
It is quite possible that one psychiatrist may perceive an “illness”in someone whereas another may not.
I agree with you fully that the situation is frightening with regard to the power Big Pharma has in fabricating “mental illnesses”.
Spontaneity of emotions would be under serious threat.
Big Pharma and Psychiatry would dictate to us the circumstances in which to be happy or sad.