Boy Drugged By Lesbian "Parents" To Be A Girl

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

Purposely adopting a child to a Butthole Explorer couple or a Snail-Trail-Faced couple.... over giving that child a home with a father and mother..
.. IS child abuse.

Why? Abuse involves significant, intentional inflict of harm.

Um, so what abuse are you referring to? And wouldn't single motherhood meet the exact same imaginary standards of 'child abuse'?

If not, why not?

Mental abuse.

Says who? Let me guess......you citing you, pretending you kinow what the fuck you're talking about?

Like when you ignored your own source AND the American Psychiatric Association AND the Diagnostic and Stastical Manual of Mental Disorders on whether or not gender dysphoria and homosexuality were mental disorders?

A child is not the state's guinea pig to see how well two sodomites or two bull daggers can raise children.

What possible relevance would sexual preference have with their suitability as parents?

And where is the abuse?

I've known people raised by fags and dykes..they are very dysfunctional, every last one of them. And all of them have said they feel like they were cheated out of a mother or father.

Prove it.

Oh, and I noticed you just straight up fled from my question about why single motherhood wouldn't meet your imaginary standards of 'child abuse'. Apparently even you don't have much use for your own standards.

Screw the APA, they've been taken over by LGBT activists. They're opinion on this matter is worth less than a Mexican food stamp.

"
NEWSHOMOSEXUALITYMon Jun 4, 2012 - 7:39 pm EST

Former president of APA says organization controlled by ‘gay rights’ movement
Matthew Cullinan Hoffman
Gay Marriage , Homosexuality ,Nicholas Cummings

June 6, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A former president of the American Psychological Association (APA), who also introduced the motion to declassify homosexuality as a mental illness in 1975, says that the APA has been taken over by “ultraliberals” beholden to the “gay rights movement,” who refuse to allow an open debate on reparative therapy for homosexuality.

Dr. Nicholas Cummings was President of the APA from 1979 to 1980, and also served as a member of the organization’s Council of Representatives. He served for years as Chief of Mental Health with the Kaiser-Permanente Health Maintenance Organization, and is the author of the book “Destructive Trends in Mental Health: The Well-Intentioned Path to Harm.”

In an interview with representatives of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) in late April, Cummings said that the organization’s problems began with the rejection of the Leona Tyler Principle, which required that all public positions of the APA be supported by scientific evidence.

The APA “started changing pretty drastically by the late 1980s,” said Cummings. “By the mid 1990s, the Leona Tyler principle was absolutely forgotten, that political stances seemed to override any scientific results. Cherry-picking results became the mode. The gay rights movement sort of captured the APA.”

Cummings says that the movement for “diversity” in the APA, which he endorsed, had resulted in a lack of diversity regarding heterosexuals.

“If I had to choose now, I would see a need to form an organization that would recruit straight white males, which are underrepresented today in the APA,” he said.

Cummings says that he personally is not in opposition to the homosexual movement, including gay “marriage,” pointing out that he was the author of the motion to strike homosexuality from the APA’s list of mental illnesses. However, he is distressed at the loss of scientific objectivity at the organization."

You do realize that Dr. Nicholas Cummings contradicts you on homosexuality being a mental disorder, yes?

You're literally ignoring your own source on the topic of the APA and mental disorders.

And of course, the APA has 36,000 members. Why would I ignore 36,000 mental health professionals and instead believe just 1? 1 that even YOU ignore on the very topic you've cited him on.

Doesn't matter, he proves that most of this "gay science" crap is politically driven bullshit. And that's the point of me posting it.

Quit trying to change the subject.

 

[Skylar]

Why? Abuse involves significant, intentional inflict of harm.

Um, so what abuse are you referring to? And wouldn't single motherhood meet the exact same imaginary standards of 'child abuse'?

If not, why not?

Mental abuse.

Says who? Let me guess......you citing you, pretending you kinow what the fuck you're talking about?

Like when you ignored your own source AND the American Psychiatric Association AND the Diagnostic and Stastical Manual of Mental Disorders on whether or not gender dysphoria and homosexuality were mental disorders?

A child is not the state's guinea pig to see how well two sodomites or two bull daggers can raise children.

What possible relevance would sexual preference have with their suitability as parents?

And where is the abuse?

I've known people raised by fags and dykes..they are very dysfunctional, every last one of them. And all of them have said they feel like they were cheated out of a mother or father.

Prove it.

Oh, and I noticed you just straight up fled from my question about why single motherhood wouldn't meet your imaginary standards of 'child abuse'. Apparently even you don't have much use for your own standards.

Screw the APA, they've been taken over by LGBT activists. They're opinion on this matter is worth less than a Mexican food stamp.

"
NEWSHOMOSEXUALITYMon Jun 4, 2012 - 7:39 pm EST

Former president of APA says organization controlled by ‘gay rights’ movement
Matthew Cullinan Hoffman
Gay Marriage , Homosexuality ,Nicholas Cummings

June 6, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A former president of the American Psychological Association (APA), who also introduced the motion to declassify homosexuality as a mental illness in 1975, says that the APA has been taken over by “ultraliberals” beholden to the “gay rights movement,” who refuse to allow an open debate on reparative therapy for homosexuality.

Dr. Nicholas Cummings was President of the APA from 1979 to 1980, and also served as a member of the organization’s Council of Representatives. He served for years as Chief of Mental Health with the Kaiser-Permanente Health Maintenance Organization, and is the author of the book “Destructive Trends in Mental Health: The Well-Intentioned Path to Harm.”

In an interview with representatives of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) in late April, Cummings said that the organization’s problems began with the rejection of the Leona Tyler Principle, which required that all public positions of the APA be supported by scientific evidence.

The APA “started changing pretty drastically by the late 1980s,” said Cummings. “By the mid 1990s, the Leona Tyler principle was absolutely forgotten, that political stances seemed to override any scientific results. Cherry-picking results became the mode. The gay rights movement sort of captured the APA.”

Cummings says that the movement for “diversity” in the APA, which he endorsed, had resulted in a lack of diversity regarding heterosexuals.

“If I had to choose now, I would see a need to form an organization that would recruit straight white males, which are underrepresented today in the APA,” he said.

Cummings says that he personally is not in opposition to the homosexual movement, including gay “marriage,” pointing out that he was the author of the motion to strike homosexuality from the APA’s list of mental illnesses. However, he is distressed at the loss of scientific objectivity at the organization."

You do realize that Dr. Nicholas Cummings contradicts you on homosexuality being a mental disorder, yes?

You're literally ignoring your own source on the topic of the APA and mental disorders.

And of course, the APA has 36,000 members. Why would I ignore 36,000 mental health professionals and instead believe just 1? 1 that even YOU ignore on the very topic you've cited him on.

Doesn't matter, he proves that most of this "gay science" crap is politically driven bullshit. And that's the point of me posting it.

It totally matters. As it demonstrates that you don't consider Dr. Nicholas Cummings to be a reliable source on the very topic we're discussing. You ignore him on issues of the APA and their classification of mental disorders.

So why would I ignore 36,000 mental health professionals in favor of one man that even you ignore?

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

Mental abuse.

Says who? Let me guess......you citing you, pretending you kinow what the fuck you're talking about?

Like when you ignored your own source AND the American Psychiatric Association AND the Diagnostic and Stastical Manual of Mental Disorders on whether or not gender dysphoria and homosexuality were mental disorders?

A child is not the state's guinea pig to see how well two sodomites or two bull daggers can raise children.

What possible relevance would sexual preference have with their suitability as parents?

And where is the abuse?

I've known people raised by fags and dykes..they are very dysfunctional, every last one of them. And all of them have said they feel like they were cheated out of a mother or father.

Prove it.

Oh, and I noticed you just straight up fled from my question about why single motherhood wouldn't meet your imaginary standards of 'child abuse'. Apparently even you don't have much use for your own standards.

Screw the APA, they've been taken over by LGBT activists. They're opinion on this matter is worth less than a Mexican food stamp.

"
NEWSHOMOSEXUALITYMon Jun 4, 2012 - 7:39 pm EST

Former president of APA says organization controlled by ‘gay rights’ movement
Matthew Cullinan Hoffman
Gay Marriage , Homosexuality ,Nicholas Cummings

June 6, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A former president of the American Psychological Association (APA), who also introduced the motion to declassify homosexuality as a mental illness in 1975, says that the APA has been taken over by “ultraliberals” beholden to the “gay rights movement,” who refuse to allow an open debate on reparative therapy for homosexuality.

Dr. Nicholas Cummings was President of the APA from 1979 to 1980, and also served as a member of the organization’s Council of Representatives. He served for years as Chief of Mental Health with the Kaiser-Permanente Health Maintenance Organization, and is the author of the book “Destructive Trends in Mental Health: The Well-Intentioned Path to Harm.”

In an interview with representatives of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) in late April, Cummings said that the organization’s problems began with the rejection of the Leona Tyler Principle, which required that all public positions of the APA be supported by scientific evidence.

The APA “started changing pretty drastically by the late 1980s,” said Cummings. “By the mid 1990s, the Leona Tyler principle was absolutely forgotten, that political stances seemed to override any scientific results. Cherry-picking results became the mode. The gay rights movement sort of captured the APA.”

Cummings says that the movement for “diversity” in the APA, which he endorsed, had resulted in a lack of diversity regarding heterosexuals.

“If I had to choose now, I would see a need to form an organization that would recruit straight white males, which are underrepresented today in the APA,” he said.

Cummings says that he personally is not in opposition to the homosexual movement, including gay “marriage,” pointing out that he was the author of the motion to strike homosexuality from the APA’s list of mental illnesses. However, he is distressed at the loss of scientific objectivity at the organization."

You do realize that Dr. Nicholas Cummings contradicts you on homosexuality being a mental disorder, yes?

You're literally ignoring your own source on the topic of the APA and mental disorders.

And of course, the APA has 36,000 members. Why would I ignore 36,000 mental health professionals and instead believe just 1? 1 that even YOU ignore on the very topic you've cited him on.

Doesn't matter, he proves that most of this "gay science" crap is politically driven bullshit. And that's the point of me posting it.

It totally matters. As it demonstrates that you don't consider Dr. Nicholas Cummings to be a reliable source on the very topic we're discussing. You ignore him on issues of the APA and their classification of mental disorders.

So why would I ignore 36,000 mental health professionals in favor of one man that even you ignore?

I don't have to agree with him on everything, you idiot. I believe him when he says the APA has been taken over by left wing lunatic LGBT activists who do not believe in objective research. We don't have to see eye to eye on every issue in order for me to take him at his word. You should be taking his word even more so... Because he is closer to you on faggotry than he to my stances on it.

So are you saying he is a liar?

 

[Skylar]

Says who? Let me guess......you citing you, pretending you kinow what the fuck you're talking about?

Like when you ignored your own source AND the American Psychiatric Association AND the Diagnostic and Stastical Manual of Mental Disorders on whether or not gender dysphoria and homosexuality were mental disorders?

What possible relevance would sexual preference have with their suitability as parents?

And where is the abuse?

Prove it.

Oh, and I noticed you just straight up fled from my question about why single motherhood wouldn't meet your imaginary standards of 'child abuse'. Apparently even you don't have much use for your own standards.

Screw the APA, they've been taken over by LGBT activists. They're opinion on this matter is worth less than a Mexican food stamp.

"
NEWSHOMOSEXUALITYMon Jun 4, 2012 - 7:39 pm EST

Former president of APA says organization controlled by ‘gay rights’ movement
Matthew Cullinan Hoffman
Gay Marriage , Homosexuality ,Nicholas Cummings

June 6, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A former president of the American Psychological Association (APA), who also introduced the motion to declassify homosexuality as a mental illness in 1975, says that the APA has been taken over by “ultraliberals” beholden to the “gay rights movement,” who refuse to allow an open debate on reparative therapy for homosexuality.

Dr. Nicholas Cummings was President of the APA from 1979 to 1980, and also served as a member of the organization’s Council of Representatives. He served for years as Chief of Mental Health with the Kaiser-Permanente Health Maintenance Organization, and is the author of the book “Destructive Trends in Mental Health: The Well-Intentioned Path to Harm.”

In an interview with representatives of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) in late April, Cummings said that the organization’s problems began with the rejection of the Leona Tyler Principle, which required that all public positions of the APA be supported by scientific evidence.

The APA “started changing pretty drastically by the late 1980s,” said Cummings. “By the mid 1990s, the Leona Tyler principle was absolutely forgotten, that political stances seemed to override any scientific results. Cherry-picking results became the mode. The gay rights movement sort of captured the APA.”

Cummings says that the movement for “diversity” in the APA, which he endorsed, had resulted in a lack of diversity regarding heterosexuals.

“If I had to choose now, I would see a need to form an organization that would recruit straight white males, which are underrepresented today in the APA,” he said.

Cummings says that he personally is not in opposition to the homosexual movement, including gay “marriage,” pointing out that he was the author of the motion to strike homosexuality from the APA’s list of mental illnesses. However, he is distressed at the loss of scientific objectivity at the organization."

You do realize that Dr. Nicholas Cummings contradicts you on homosexuality being a mental disorder, yes?

You're literally ignoring your own source on the topic of the APA and mental disorders.

And of course, the APA has 36,000 members. Why would I ignore 36,000 mental health professionals and instead believe just 1? 1 that even YOU ignore on the very topic you've cited him on.

Doesn't matter, he proves that most of this "gay science" crap is politically driven bullshit. And that's the point of me posting it.

It totally matters. As it demonstrates that you don't consider Dr. Nicholas Cummings to be a reliable source on the very topic we're discussing. You ignore him on issues of the APA and their classification of mental disorders.

So why would I ignore 36,000 mental health professionals in favor of one man that even you ignore?

I don't have to agree with him on everything, you idiot.

You're ignoring him on the very issue you're citing......the APA and the designation of mental disorders.

If he can't be trusted to give us accurate information on the APA and the designation of mental disorders.....why are you citing him on the APA and the designation of mental disorders?

Especially when 36,000 mental healthcare professionals and the Diagnostic and Stastical Manual of Mental Disorders contradict him?

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

Screw the APA, they've been taken over by LGBT activists. They're opinion on this matter is worth less than a Mexican food stamp.

"
NEWSHOMOSEXUALITYMon Jun 4, 2012 - 7:39 pm EST

Former president of APA says organization controlled by ‘gay rights’ movement
Matthew Cullinan Hoffman
Gay Marriage , Homosexuality ,Nicholas Cummings

June 6, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A former president of the American Psychological Association (APA), who also introduced the motion to declassify homosexuality as a mental illness in 1975, says that the APA has been taken over by “ultraliberals” beholden to the “gay rights movement,” who refuse to allow an open debate on reparative therapy for homosexuality.

Dr. Nicholas Cummings was President of the APA from 1979 to 1980, and also served as a member of the organization’s Council of Representatives. He served for years as Chief of Mental Health with the Kaiser-Permanente Health Maintenance Organization, and is the author of the book “Destructive Trends in Mental Health: The Well-Intentioned Path to Harm.”

In an interview with representatives of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) in late April, Cummings said that the organization’s problems began with the rejection of the Leona Tyler Principle, which required that all public positions of the APA be supported by scientific evidence.

The APA “started changing pretty drastically by the late 1980s,” said Cummings. “By the mid 1990s, the Leona Tyler principle was absolutely forgotten, that political stances seemed to override any scientific results. Cherry-picking results became the mode. The gay rights movement sort of captured the APA.”

Cummings says that the movement for “diversity” in the APA, which he endorsed, had resulted in a lack of diversity regarding heterosexuals.

“If I had to choose now, I would see a need to form an organization that would recruit straight white males, which are underrepresented today in the APA,” he said.

Cummings says that he personally is not in opposition to the homosexual movement, including gay “marriage,” pointing out that he was the author of the motion to strike homosexuality from the APA’s list of mental illnesses. However, he is distressed at the loss of scientific objectivity at the organization."

You do realize that Dr. Nicholas Cummings contradicts you on homosexuality being a mental disorder, yes?

You're literally ignoring your own source on the topic of the APA and mental disorders.

And of course, the APA has 36,000 members. Why would I ignore 36,000 mental health professionals and instead believe just 1? 1 that even YOU ignore on the very topic you've cited him on.

Doesn't matter, he proves that most of this "gay science" crap is politically driven bullshit. And that's the point of me posting it.

It totally matters. As it demonstrates that you don't consider Dr. Nicholas Cummings to be a reliable source on the very topic we're discussing. You ignore him on issues of the APA and their classification of mental disorders.

So why would I ignore 36,000 mental health professionals in favor of one man that even you ignore?

I don't have to agree with him on everything, you idiot.

You're ignoring him on the very issue you're citing......the APA and the designation of mental disorders.

If he can't be trusted to give us accurate information on the APA and the designation of mental disorders.....why are you citing him on the APA and the designation of mental disorders?

Especially when 36,000 mental healthcare professionals and the Diagnostic and Stastical Manual of Mental Disorders contradict him?

No I am not. We are not talking about that the moment. We are talking about the APA's credibility and on this subject.... On that, Cummings and I agree. You keep wanting to change the subject.

Start a thread about his belief it is characterological or something. Right now, I have shown the APA is more than suspect and he flat out said they're science is not objective and they are politically driven.

Now address that or go start a thread, maybe I will respond to it.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

"36,000 blah blah blah" That's an appeal to authority fallacy on your part. 36,000 mental health professionals that are left wing activists are not above question.

Try harder.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

Lookee here, Skylar:

"According to the United States Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics, there are over 552,000 mental health professionals practicing in the U.S. today whose main focus is the treatment (and/or diagnosis) of mental health or substance abuse concerns."

Mental Health Professionals: US Statistics

So the APA's 36,000 are what, 6% or so of that total? Hardly can they count as the end all and be all authority on anything concerning mental health.

 

[Silhouette]

Yup. Do you know what 'get to the point' means? Because if you do, you might want to.

Skylar, what's your position on MDs prescribing carcinogenic hormones outside the approved use by the FDA?....to children....?

 

[Skylar]

Lookee here, Skylar:

"According to the United States Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics, there are over 552,000 mental health professionals practicing in the U.S. today whose main focus is the treatment (and/or diagnosis) of mental health or substance abuse concerns."

Mental Health Professionals: US Statistics

So the APA's 36,000 are what, 6% or so of that total? Hardly can they count as they end all and be all authority on anything concerning mental health.

Then show me a larger and more prestigious group of mental health professionals in the country that contradicts them. Or a source on mental illness more universally accepted in the US than the DSM.

I'll give you a hint: Its not Dr. Nicholas Cummings.....a man even *you* ignore on the issue of the designation of mental disorders.

 

[Skylar]

Yup. Do you know what 'get to the point' means? Because if you do, you might want to.

Skylar, what's your position on MDs prescribing carcinogenic hormones outside the approved use by the FDA?....to children....?

Carcinogenic according to who?

And my position on drugs to suppress puberty given to adolescents it the same as the Endocrine Society....which I've already posted in this thread.

 

[Silhouette]

Yup. Do you know what 'get to the point' means? Because if you do, you might want to.

Skylar, what's your position on MDs prescribing carcinogenic hormones outside the approved use by the FDA?....to children....?

Carcinogenic according to who?

And my position on drugs to suppress puberty given to adolescents it the same as the Endocrine Society....which I've already posted in this thread.

The World Health Organization. You didn't answer my question. Prescribing puberty suppressing hormones outside the FDA's approved use is wrong, yes? Your thoughts?

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

Lookee here, Skylar:

"According to the United States Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics, there are over 552,000 mental health professionals practicing in the U.S. today whose main focus is the treatment (and/or diagnosis) of mental health or substance abuse concerns."

Mental Health Professionals: US Statistics

So the APA's 36,000 are what, 6% or so of that total? Hardly can they count as they end all and be all authority on anything concerning mental health.

Then show me a larger and more prestigious group of mental health professionals in the country that contradicts them. Or a source on mental illness more universally accepted in the US than the DSM.

I'll give you a hint: Its not Dr. Nicholas Cummings.....a man even *you* ignore on the issue of the designation of mental disorders.

Why does it have to be a larger and more prestigious group? Why cant it be well respected individual mental health professionals? You keep falling back on that appeal to authority fallacy every time.

 

[Skylar]

Yup. Do you know what 'get to the point' means? Because if you do, you might want to.

Skylar, what's your position on MDs prescribing carcinogenic hormones outside the approved use by the FDA?....to children....?

Carcinogenic according to who?

And my position on drugs to suppress puberty given to adolescents it the same as the Endocrine Society....which I've already posted in this thread.

The World Health Organization. You didn't answer my question. Prescribing puberty suppressing hormones outside the FDA's approved use is wrong, yes? Your thoughts?

Show me. Don't tell me.

And I've directly answered your question. I've even cited the Endrocrine Society's guidelines and recommendations in this thread. So you don't even have to do any research. You just have to go back a page or two and read it.

You refuse.

And once again.....you argue your own ignorance. Enjoy. Your willful ignorance has never been my problem. Its always been yours.

 

[Skylar]

Lookee here, Skylar:

"According to the United States Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics, there are over 552,000 mental health professionals practicing in the U.S. today whose main focus is the treatment (and/or diagnosis) of mental health or substance abuse concerns."

Mental Health Professionals: US Statistics

So the APA's 36,000 are what, 6% or so of that total? Hardly can they count as they end all and be all authority on anything concerning mental health.

Then show me a larger and more prestigious group of mental health professionals in the country that contradicts them. Or a source on mental illness more universally accepted in the US than the DSM.

I'll give you a hint: Its not Dr. Nicholas Cummings.....a man even *you* ignore on the issue of the designation of mental disorders.

Why does it have to be a larger and more prestigious group? Why cant it be well respected individual mental health professionals? You keep falling back on that appeal to authority fallacy every time.

Credibility.

The APA produces the DSM, the single most authoritative manual on mental disorders in the US. You'll have to have a *much* better source to refute it.

And so far your only source......even YOU ignored.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

Lookee here, Skylar:

"According to the United States Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics, there are over 552,000 mental health professionals practicing in the U.S. today whose main focus is the treatment (and/or diagnosis) of mental health or substance abuse concerns."

Mental Health Professionals: US Statistics

So the APA's 36,000 are what, 6% or so of that total? Hardly can they count as they end all and be all authority on anything concerning mental health.

Then show me a larger and more prestigious group of mental health professionals in the country that contradicts them. Or a source on mental illness more universally accepted in the US than the DSM.

I'll give you a hint: Its not Dr. Nicholas Cummings.....a man even *you* ignore on the issue of the designation of mental disorders.

Why does it have to be a larger and more prestigious group? Why cant it be well respected individual mental health professionals? You keep falling back on that appeal to authority fallacy every time.

Credibility.

The APA produces the DSM, the single most authoritative manual on mental disorders in the US. You'll have to have a *much* better source to refute it.

And so far your only source......even YOU ignored.

The APA and DSM's credibility is not beyond criticism and actually many mental health professionals do not give it credit. As shown here:
"
The Real Problems With Psychiatry

A psychotherapist contends that the DSM, psychiatry's "bible" that defines all mental illness, is not scientific but a product of unscrupulous politics and bureaucracy.

• 7.0k
  

TEXT SIZE

• HOPE REESE
• MAY 2, 2013
  
• HEALTH

Wikimedia Commons
On May 22, the American Psychiatric Association will release the fifthDiagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the DSM-5. It classifies psychiatric diagnoses and the criteria required to meet them. Gary Greenberg, one of the book's biggest critics, claims these disorders aren't real -- they're invented. Author of Manufacturing Depression: The Secret History of a Modern Disease and contributor to The New Yorker, Mother Jones, The New York Times and other publications, Greenberg is a practicing psychotherapist. The Book of Woe: The Making of the DSM-5 and the Unmaking of Psychiatry is his exposé of the business behind the creation of the new manual.

Can you talk about how the first DSM, published in 1952, was conceived?

One of the reasons was to count people. The first collections of diagnoses were called the "statistical manual," not the "diagnostic and statistical manual." There were also parochial reasons. As the rest of medicine became oriented toward diagnosing illnesses by seeking their causes in biochemistry, in the late 19th, early 20th century, the claim to authority of any medical specialty hinged on its ability to diagnose suffering. To say "okay, your sore throat and fever are strep throat." But psychiatry was unable to do that and was in danger of being discredited. As early as 1886, prominent psychiatrists worried that they would be left behind, or written out of the medical kingdom. For reasons not entirely clear, the government turned to the American Medico-Psychological Association, (later the American Psychiatric Association, or APA), to tell them how many mentally ill people were out there. The APA used it as an opportunity to establish its credibility.

How has the DSM evolved to become seen as the "authoritative medical guide to all of mental suffering"?

The credibility of psychiatry is tied to its nosology. What developed over time is the number of diagnoses, and, more importantly, the method by which diagnostic categories are established.

You're a practicing psychotherapist. Can you define "mental illness"?

No. Nobody can.

It's circular -- thinking that anybody who commits suicide is depressed; anybody who goes into a school with a loaded gun and shoots people must have a mental illness.
The DSM lists "disorders." How are disorders different from diseases or illnesses?

The difference between disease and disorder is an attempt on the part of psychiatry to evade the problem they're presented with. Disease is a kind of suffering that's caused by a bio-chemical pathology. Something that can be discovered and targeted with magic bullets. But in many cases our suffering can't be diagnosed that way. Psychiatry was in a crisis in the 1970s over questions like "what is a mental illness?" and "what mental illnesses exist?" One of the first things they did was try to finesse the problem that no mental illness met that definition of a disease. They had yet to identify what the pathogen was, what the disease process consisted of, and how to cure it. So they created a category called "disorder." It's a rhetorical device. It's saying "it's sort of like a disease," but not calling it a disease because all the other doctors will jump down their throats asking, "where's your blood test?" The reason there haven't been any sensible findings tying genetics or any kind of molecular biology to DSM categories is not only that our instruments are crude, but also that the DSM categories aren't real. It's like using a map of the moon to find your way around Russia.

So would you say that these terms --disorder, disease, illness -- are just different names for the same concept?

I would. Psychiatrists wouldn't. Well, psychiatrists would say it sometimes but wouldn't say it other times. They will say it when it comes to claiming that they belong squarely in the field of medicine. But if you press them and ask if these disorders exist in the same way that cancer and diabetes exist, they'll say no. It's not that there are no biological correlates to any mental suffering -- of course there are. But the specificity and sensitivity that we require to distinguish pneumonia from lung cancer, even that kind of distinction, it just doesn't exist.

What are the most common misconceptions about the scientific nature of diseases such as depression?

I guarantee you that in the course of our conversation a doctor is telling a patient, "you have a chemical imbalance -- that's why you're depressed. Take Prozac." Despite the fact that every doctor who knows anything knows that there is no biochemical imbalance that causes depression, and most doctors understand that a diagnosis of depression doesn't really tell you anything other than what you already knew, that doesn't stop them from saying it.

Research on the brain is still in its infancy. Do you think we will ever know enough about the brain to prove that certain psychiatric diagnoses have a direct biological cause?

I'd be willing to bet everything that whenever it happens, whatever we find out about the brain and mental suffering is not going to map, at all, onto the DSM categories. Let's say we can elucidate the entire structure of a given kind of mental suffering. We're not going to be able to say, "here's Major Depressive Disorder, and here's what it looks like in the brain." If there's any success, it will involve a whole remapping of the terrain of mental disorders. And psychiatry may very likely take very small findings and trump them up into something they aren't. But the most honest outcome would be to go back to the old days and just look at symptoms. They might get good at elucidating the circuitry of fear or anxiety or these kinds of things.

What is the difference between a disorder and distress that is a normal occurrence in our lives?

That distinction is made by a clinician, whether it's a family doctor or a psychiatrist or whoever. But nobody knows exactly how to make that determination. There are no established thresholds. Even if you could imagine how that would work, it would have to be a subjective analysis of the extent to which the person's functioning is impaired. How are you going to measure that? Doctors are supposed to measure "clinical significance." What's that? For many people, the fact that someone shows up in their office is clinical significance. I'm not going to say that's wrong, but it's not scientific. And there's a conflict of interest -- if I don't determine clinical significance, I don't get paid.

You say one of the issues with taking these categories too seriously is that it eliminates the moral aspect behind certain behaviors.

Homosexuality was deleted from the DSM by a referendum. A straight up vote: yes or no
It's our characteristic way of chalking up what we think is "evil" to what we think of as mental disease. Our gut reaction is always "that was really sick. Those guys in Boston -- they were really sick." But how do we know? Unless you decide in advance that anybody who does anything heinous is sick. This society is very wary of using the term "evil." But I firmly believe there is such a thing as evil. It's circular -- thinking that anybody who commits suicide is depressed; anybody who goes into a school with a loaded gun and shoots people must have a mental illness. There's a certain kind of comfort in that, but there's no indication for it, particularly because we don't know what mental illness is.

How do diagnoses affect people?

One of the overlooked ways is that diagnoses can change people's lives for the better. Asperger's Syndrome is probably the most successful psychiatric disorder ever in this respect. It created a community. It gave people whose primary symptom was isolation a way to belong and provided resources to those who were diagnosed. It can also have bad effects. A depression diagnosis gives people an identity formed around having a disease that we know doesn't exist, and how that can divert resources from where they might be needed. Imagine how much less depression there would be if people weren't worried about tuition, health care, and retirement. Those are all things that aren't provided by Prozac.

What are the dangers of over-diagnosing a population? Are false positives worse than false negatives?

I believe that false positives, people who are diagnosed because there's a diagnosis for them and they show up in a doctor's office, is a much bigger problem. It changes people's identities, it encourages the use of drugs whose side effects and long-term effects are unknown, and main effects are poorly understood.

In 1850, doctor Samuel Cartwright invented "drapetomania" -- a disease causing slaves to run away. How do social and historical context affect our understanding of mental illness?

Cartwright was a slaveholder's doctor from New Orleans -- he believed in the inferiority of what he called the "African races." He believed that abolitionism was based on a misguided notion that black people and white people were essentially equal. He thought that the desire for freedom in a black person was pathological because black people were born to be enslaved. To aspire to freedom was a betrayal of their nature, a disease. He invented "drapetomania," the impulse to run away from slavery. Assuming there wasn't horrible cruelty being inflicted on the slaves, they were "sick." He came up with a few diagnostic criteria and presented it to his colleagues.

So we corrected our notion of what counts as a "disease." Is there a modern equivalent?

Homosexuality is the most obvious example. Until 1973, it was listed as a disease. It's very easy to see what's wrong with "drapetomania," but it's easier to see the balancing act involved in saying homosexuality is or isn't a disease -- how something has to shift in society. The people who called homosexuality a disease weren't necessarily bigots or homophobes -- they were just trying to understand people who wanted to love people of their own sex. Disease is a way to understand difference that includes compassion. What has to shift is the idea that same-sex love is acceptable. Once that idea is there, it doesn't make sense to call homosexuality a disease.

Who was involved in the creation of the DSM-5?

The American Psychiatric Association owns the DSM. They aren't only responsible for it: they own it, sell it, and license it. The DSM is created by a group of committees. It's a bureaucratic process. In place of scientific findings, the DSM uses expert consensus to determine what mental disorders exist and how you can recognize them. Disorders come into the book the same way a law becomes part of the book of statutes. People suggest it, discuss it, and vote on it. Homosexuality was deleted from the DSM by a referendum. A straight up vote: yes or no. It's not always that explicit, and the votes are not public. In the case of the DSM-5, committee members were forbidden to talk about it, so we'll never really know what the deliberations were. They all signed non-disclosure agreements.

You can't just ask for special services for a student who is awkward. You have to get special services for a student with autism.
What are the important changes made in the new DSM, and how will they affect patients?

It's going to cause a lot of trouble when Asperger's Syndrome disappears. It may cause some trouble when the bereavement exclusion disappears. That's a good example of why the APA's going to be in trouble. It was so unnecessary, so stupid. They've made the absurd statement that they know the difference, two weeks after someone's wife dies, that person is "depressed," or just "in mourning." Come on! Who are these guys?"

From the right wing rag *sarcasm*:

The Real Problems With Psychiatry

 

[Gracie]

This kids picture tells a tale. How frigging sad is that?

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

This kids picture tells a tale. How frigging sad is that?

It's not just sad...it's infuriating.

I could imagine how overpowering those slug trailing freaks are over that kid just looking at him. My guess is he kept peeing on the toilet seat and so they decided they wanted him to start peeing sitting down, the evil man-hating scum that they are.

 

[Gracie]

This kids picture tells a tale. How frigging sad is that?

It's not just sad...it's infuriating.

Yes. It is.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

This kids picture tells a tale. How frigging sad is that?

It's not just sad...it's infuriating.

Yes. It is.

Don't know if you agree with what I said in the edit...just a heads up.

 

[aaronleland]

This kids picture tells a tale. How frigging sad is that?

The poor kid is stuck with lesbians. And not even hot ones.