Diagnostic Wannabes

IF 2.6 0 PHILOSOPHY Philosophy Psychiatry & Psychology Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1353/ppp.2023.a908280
Jennifer Radden
{"title":"Diagnostic Wannabes","authors":"Jennifer Radden","doi":"10.1353/ppp.2023.a908280","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Diagnostic Wannabes Jennifer Radden, PhD (bio) Saunders explores challenges for the clinician faced with self-styled sufferers from attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, bipolar disorder, autism spectrum disorder (ASD), and fibromyalgia. The diagnostic system was not meant to be used as “a scaffold for identity,” she points out. Yet wannabe patients now step into the clinic wielding self-proclaimed diagnoses as social identities. Saunders explains the context where such phenomena arise, and offers guidelines for clinicians addressing this new reality. To do so, she enlists Rashed’s innovative normative approach to the so-called boundary problem of assigning, and providing justification for, the contested line between normal and disordered. The boundary problem itself seems to rise to prominence during our current era of increasingly dimensional thinking, it is worth noting, with psychiatric diagnoses taken to refer to points on a continuum, rather than to discrete categorical disease entities. On the likely sources of these ‘diagnostic’ social identities, as well as reasons why certain diagnoses attach to them more commonly than others, Saunders points to social trends (including what she asserts to be a “post-stigma” cultural environment), the failure of efforts to identify neurobiological markers for psychiatric disorder, the ubiquity of social media, the algorithms themselves, and the hyperconnected existence of contemporary times. Such narratives also offer the comforts of a sense of belonging and explanations for perceived inadequacies, she rightly observes. Despite today’s virtual and other inducements, the problem introduced here is not an entirely new one. The first part of the seventeenth century in Europe saw an apparent “epidemic” of what was known as “melancholy,” a condition associated with the spleen, whose symptoms loosely resembled those of today’s depression and anxiety. Much of this suffering was undeniably real, but much was a fashionable, identity-conferring pose. “Every distemper of the body now is complicated with spleen,” the poet John Donne ironically observes in a letter dated 1622, “and when we were young men we scarce ever heard of the spleen. In our declinations now, every accident is accompanied with heavy clouds of melancholy”1 (Gosse, 2019). By then, the Melancholic Man (or homo melancholicus), with his surfeit of spleen, was an unmistakable character type—or social identity, as we would now say. Recognized and saluted in centuries-long literary and illustrative traditions, the type was an anchoring element of the humoral medicine which, despite the gradual emergence of more empirical science, had endured since Galenic times. Melancholy’s closest descendants, affective depressive and anxiety disorders, are today less evident among the troubling identities Saunders discusses—somewhat preempted, she points out, by more cognitively-based diagnoses such as ASD. [End Page 279] This is itself an ironic reminder of the vagaries of cultural attitudes, cautioning us to remember the broader context where these particular social identities are selected for emulation and adoption. The lure of the melancholy man’s2 social identity is well understood: already normalized, within the humoral system in which excess black bile afflicted roughly one in four people, it had been valorized for centuries—arguably by Aristotelian writing (in the dubious ‘Problems’), during the Renaissance by Ficino, and Shakespeare—even by Freud in his 1916 ‘Mourning and Melancholia.’ Through most of Western history, the positive attributes and benefits of the dark moods of melancholy have needed no further explaining or justifying. They glow with glamorous associations. Applying Rashed’s conditions for appropriately acknowledging and recognizing the fit of a person’s chosen social identity, Saunders‘ guidance for clinicians clarifies boundary matters. And it illustrates how to understand, regulate and communicate the appropriate norms in ways that can dissuade those whose personal growth and mental health are not served by claiming such identities. With at least some of the popular social identities Saunders describes, I think we can helpfully continue the comparison with the homo melancholicus. For the ‘neurodiversity’ rhetoric of our own times contains forces promoting both the normalization and the valorization of syndromes such as ASD. Pointing to analogies with differences of gender, ethnicity and culture, neurodiversity theorizing argues for a respect for, and appreciation of, difference. Mental or cognitive variations are equally natural and valuable, it is...","PeriodicalId":45397,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy Psychiatry & Psychology","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy Psychiatry & Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ppp.2023.a908280","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Diagnostic Wannabes Jennifer Radden, PhD (bio) Saunders explores challenges for the clinician faced with self-styled sufferers from attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, bipolar disorder, autism spectrum disorder (ASD), and fibromyalgia. The diagnostic system was not meant to be used as “a scaffold for identity,” she points out. Yet wannabe patients now step into the clinic wielding self-proclaimed diagnoses as social identities. Saunders explains the context where such phenomena arise, and offers guidelines for clinicians addressing this new reality. To do so, she enlists Rashed’s innovative normative approach to the so-called boundary problem of assigning, and providing justification for, the contested line between normal and disordered. The boundary problem itself seems to rise to prominence during our current era of increasingly dimensional thinking, it is worth noting, with psychiatric diagnoses taken to refer to points on a continuum, rather than to discrete categorical disease entities. On the likely sources of these ‘diagnostic’ social identities, as well as reasons why certain diagnoses attach to them more commonly than others, Saunders points to social trends (including what she asserts to be a “post-stigma” cultural environment), the failure of efforts to identify neurobiological markers for psychiatric disorder, the ubiquity of social media, the algorithms themselves, and the hyperconnected existence of contemporary times. Such narratives also offer the comforts of a sense of belonging and explanations for perceived inadequacies, she rightly observes. Despite today’s virtual and other inducements, the problem introduced here is not an entirely new one. The first part of the seventeenth century in Europe saw an apparent “epidemic” of what was known as “melancholy,” a condition associated with the spleen, whose symptoms loosely resembled those of today’s depression and anxiety. Much of this suffering was undeniably real, but much was a fashionable, identity-conferring pose. “Every distemper of the body now is complicated with spleen,” the poet John Donne ironically observes in a letter dated 1622, “and when we were young men we scarce ever heard of the spleen. In our declinations now, every accident is accompanied with heavy clouds of melancholy”1 (Gosse, 2019). By then, the Melancholic Man (or homo melancholicus), with his surfeit of spleen, was an unmistakable character type—or social identity, as we would now say. Recognized and saluted in centuries-long literary and illustrative traditions, the type was an anchoring element of the humoral medicine which, despite the gradual emergence of more empirical science, had endured since Galenic times. Melancholy’s closest descendants, affective depressive and anxiety disorders, are today less evident among the troubling identities Saunders discusses—somewhat preempted, she points out, by more cognitively-based diagnoses such as ASD. [End Page 279] This is itself an ironic reminder of the vagaries of cultural attitudes, cautioning us to remember the broader context where these particular social identities are selected for emulation and adoption. The lure of the melancholy man’s2 social identity is well understood: already normalized, within the humoral system in which excess black bile afflicted roughly one in four people, it had been valorized for centuries—arguably by Aristotelian writing (in the dubious ‘Problems’), during the Renaissance by Ficino, and Shakespeare—even by Freud in his 1916 ‘Mourning and Melancholia.’ Through most of Western history, the positive attributes and benefits of the dark moods of melancholy have needed no further explaining or justifying. They glow with glamorous associations. Applying Rashed’s conditions for appropriately acknowledging and recognizing the fit of a person’s chosen social identity, Saunders‘ guidance for clinicians clarifies boundary matters. And it illustrates how to understand, regulate and communicate the appropriate norms in ways that can dissuade those whose personal growth and mental health are not served by claiming such identities. With at least some of the popular social identities Saunders describes, I think we can helpfully continue the comparison with the homo melancholicus. For the ‘neurodiversity’ rhetoric of our own times contains forces promoting both the normalization and the valorization of syndromes such as ASD. Pointing to analogies with differences of gender, ethnicity and culture, neurodiversity theorizing argues for a respect for, and appreciation of, difference. Mental or cognitive variations are equally natural and valuable, it is...
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
诊断崇拜者
詹妮弗·拉登博士(生物)桑德斯探讨了临床医生面临的挑战,这些患者自称患有注意力缺陷多动障碍、创伤后应激障碍、双相情感障碍、自闭症谱系障碍(ASD)和纤维肌痛。她指出,诊断系统并不是用来作为“身份的脚手架”。然而,想要成为患者的人现在走进诊所,把自己宣称的诊断作为社会身份。桑德斯解释了这种现象产生的背景,并为临床医生提供了解决这一新现实的指导方针。为了做到这一点,她采用了拉希德的创新规范方法来解决所谓的边界问题,即分配正常与无序之间有争议的界限,并为其提供理由。值得注意的是,边界问题本身似乎在我们当前这个维度思维日益增加的时代变得突出,精神病学诊断被认为是指连续体上的点,而不是离散的分类疾病实体。关于这些“诊断性”社会身份的可能来源,以及为什么某些诊断比其他诊断更常见的原因,桑德斯指出了社会趋势(包括她所说的“后耻辱”文化环境),识别精神障碍神经生物学标记的努力失败,无处不在的社交媒体,算法本身,以及当代的超连接存在。她正确地观察到,这样的叙述也提供了一种归属感和对感知不足的解释的安慰。尽管今天有虚拟的和其他的诱因,这里介绍的问题并不是一个全新的问题。17世纪上半叶,欧洲出现了一种被称为“忧郁”的明显“流行病”,这是一种与脾脏有关的疾病,其症状与今天的抑郁和焦虑有些相似。不可否认,这些苦难中有很多是真实的,但也有很多是一种时髦的、赋予身份的姿态。诗人约翰·多恩(John Donne)在1622年的一封信中讽刺地写道:“现在身体的每一种热症都与脾脏有关,而我们年轻时几乎从未听说过脾脏。”在我们现在的衰落中,每一次事故都伴随着沉重的忧郁的云”(Gosse, 2019)。到那时,“忧郁的人”(或“忧郁症人”),因为他的脾脏过多,是一种明确无误的性格类型——或者像我们现在所说的,是一种社会身份。在长达几个世纪的文学和插图传统中,这种类型被认可和致敬,是体液医学的一个锚定元素,尽管越来越多的经验科学逐渐出现,但自盖伦时代以来一直存在。忧郁症的近亲,情感抑郁症和焦虑症,今天在桑德斯讨论的令人不安的特征中不那么明显——她指出,在某种程度上,被更多基于认知的诊断,如ASD,所取代。这本身就是一个讽刺的提醒,提醒我们文化态度的变幻莫测,提醒我们要记住更广泛的背景,在这个背景下,这些特定的社会身份被选择为模仿和采用。忧郁的人的社会身份的诱惑是很容易理解的:在体液系统中,大约四分之一的人患有过量的黑胆汁,它已经被正常化了,几个世纪以来一直被重视——可以说是由亚里士多德的作品(在可疑的“问题”中),文艺复兴时期的菲西诺和莎士比亚,甚至是弗洛伊德在1916年的《哀悼与忧郁》中。纵观西方历史,忧郁的阴暗情绪的积极属性和好处无需进一步解释或证明。他们散发着迷人的光芒。运用Rashed的条件来适当地承认和识别一个人所选择的社会身份的适合性,桑德斯对临床医生的指导澄清了边界问题。它说明了如何理解、规范和传达适当的规范,以阻止那些声称这样的身份无助于个人成长和心理健康的人。至少有了桑德斯所描述的一些流行的社会身份,我认为我们可以继续与忧郁症人进行比较。因为我们这个时代的“神经多样性”修辞包含了促进自闭症等综合症正常化和增值的力量。神经多样性理论以性别、种族和文化的差异为类比,主张尊重和欣赏差异。心理或认知的变化同样自然和有价值,它是……
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
4.30%
发文量
40
期刊最新文献
The Limits of Self-Constitution How to Measure Depression: Looking Back on the Making of Psychiatric Assessment Psychodramatic Psychotherapy for Schizophrenic Individuals About the Authors Close Enemies: The Relationship of Psychiatry and Psychology in the Assessment of Mental Disorders
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1