Maggie’s Farm describes a href=”http://maggiesfarm.anotherdotcom.com/archives/12044-Shrinks-gone-nuts.html” how psychiatrists and others/a have “gone nuts” due to their desire to include sex addiction, shopping addiction and other behaviors as clinical disorders in the forthcoming DSM-V which is a revision of current a href=”http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0890420254?ie=UTF8tag=wwwviolentkicomlinkCode=as2camp=1789creative=9325creativeASIN=0890420254″Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV:/aimg src=”http://www.assoc-amazon.com/e/ir?t=wwwviolentkicoml=as2o=1a=0890420254″ width=”1″ height=”1″ border=”0″ alt=”" style=”border:none !important; margin:0px !important;” /br /br /blockquoteI knew they went over the edge when they began talking about Sex Addiction. Who gets to define that? These are the sorts of thing that makes people think shrinks are nuts, and damage their reputations as serious Docs. You cannot pathologize every human idiosyncrasy, desire, hobby, or preoccupation, because these are the things that make people interesting, unique, and colorful./blockquotebr /br /Slate has a a href=”http://www.slate.com/id/2223479/”good article about the DSM /a subtitled, “The Diagnostic madness of DSM-V” which seems fitting:br /br /blockquote….The fifth edition of the association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders is expected in 2012. The APA isn’t just deciding the fate of shopaholics; it’s also debating whether overuse of the Internet, “excessive” sexual activity, apathy, and even prolonged bitterness should be viewed, quite seriously, as brain “disorders.” If you spend hours online, have sex more frequently than aging psychiatrists, and moan incessantly that the federal government can’t account for all its TARP funds, take heed: You may soon be classed among the 48 million Americans the APA already considers mentally ill./blockquotebr /br /So, how would you decide what constitutes excessive sexual activity?
July 26, 2009 - 7:27 am