Ahh the DSM. Anyone
with even a passing familiarity with psychology is aware of its
existence. To mental health professionals all over North America, the
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) is the
defacto bible by which they shape their careers. Within it is listed
every condition discovered by psychological professions up to this
point. To society, it is the gold standard by which all mental health
conditions are categorized and understood. It is the lens by which
most of us view the workings of our own minds, whether we realize it
or not.
But is it the best
way?
I've been thinking a
lot about the DSM lately for many reasons (my book-in-progress and my self-discovery of also having ADHD-Inattentive, to name a few), and its
led me to one inescapable conclusion; in some ways, the DSM is the
worst enemy of anyone who challenges what I like to call the
'pathology paradigm' present in psychology. Simply put, the DSM is
the tool by which, whether knowingly or not, mental health
professionals perpetuate our culture of stigma and oppression towards
those who are differently wired. The problem isn't even really with
the DSM; as a field guide to the various ways in which human minds
can be constructed, its very valuable as it has been thoroughly
researched and can effectively give guidance on what kinds of
problems someone with any of the conditions listed within may
possibly face. The issues arise, however, when we start to treat the
DSM as the unflinching word of the gods.
I read an
interesting article recently on the topic of neurodiversity which
argued that in order for any real change to happen in this area,
those of us who are neurodivergent would have to stop using the
“tools of our oppressors,” (disability first language, words like
pathology and disorder, etc.). While I'm not strictly anti-psychiatry
per se, the author had a valid point and it is encapsulated in the
tendency of the DSM, and psychology in general, to pathologize the
human mind and its various personality types. By its very nature,
psychology seeks to categorize and classify the various states of the
brain and identify 'disorders,' but who exactly decides what is a
disorder and what is simply a divergent state of normal human wiring?
Such classifications are all-too-often culturally biased and based
almost entirely on what is deemed acceptable by the standards of the
society in which they have been created. By accepting such a practice
without even considering the socially constructed element of
disability, are we not effectively filtering otherwise normal human
personality types through an arbitrarily designed acceptability
filter?
Don't get me wrong;
I understand full well that there are certain conditions listed in
the DSM which genuinely are concerning both for the safety of society
and the individual themselves. In our search for more and more of
those however, we must be careful to avoid pathologizing personality
types. After all, if we as a species are naturally diverse
physically, culturally and even spiritually, why not mentally? There
is no one-size-fits-all human body, so why must the brain conform to
such rigid standards of normalcy? We need to move away from the
traditional medically-based understanding of psychology and towards
one which blends what we have learned with an understanding of the
wonderful diversity of human nature. One which respects the identity
and agency of each and every human being and which doesn't simply
reduce them to a diagnostic label on a testing document.
After all, I may be
an Aspie, and I may have ADHD, but I am Adam first and foremost.
These have shaped me and are a part of me, but at the end of the day
I deserve far more than to be reduced to a simple pathology.
The same is true of
every human on this planet, no matter the challenges we face.
As always yours in
diversity,
Adam Michael
Oh, by the way, here's the link to the article I mentioned in this post. Definitely worth a read!:
http://un-boxedbrain.com.au/2016/02/oppressors-tools/
No comments:
Post a Comment