DSM-5 As a Gift for the Lazy

DSM-5 continues to cater to lazy consumerists in thrall to pharmaceutical companies and now pathologizes every emotional state and every aspect of being human:

It is a peculiar and reductive logic about the nature of being human, this idea that grief – or stress, or bingeing on pie – merits medical intervention. And it is a logic that pervades the DSM revisions, which is why the manual is proving wildly controversial on the eve of its unveiling.

Feel anything? There is a pill for that!

I can’t stop laughing at the naive folks who keep blabbing earnestly about the “stigma” against psychotropic medication. What stigma? It is now hugely fashionable to carry a bunch of completely invented “disorders” that need constant medication:

This is the overriding concern of mental health professionals who oppose the DSM-5. As the manual grows (the original had 95 mental disorders; the last edition, 283), they argue that it lowers so many thresholds for being diagnosed with minor mental illnesses that life, itself, becomes treatable as disease.

Which is, of course, what the pharmaceutical companies have been praying for. As the Chair of McGill University’s Department of Psychiatry says,

“The problem lies not with this particular edition [of the DSM] but with the ideology behind it, which is that mental illness is neurobiological, and that psychosocial factors are not that important. This is the position that has taken over academic and clinical psychiatry over recent decades, and it has led to a serious overprescription of medications.”

The really hilarious thing about this is how deftly the pharmaceutical companies have managed to weave this consumerist obsession with psychotropic drugs into the Liberal discourse. Crowds of people seriously believe that they are being progressive when they defend the pharma companies’ right to stuff their junk down everybody’s throats.

At its margins, which is where many of us – the bereaved, the heartbroken, the flat-broke – reside, this is about what story we want to tell ourselves about who we are. Our narratives, as we live and ascribe meaning to them, are richer and more nuanced than what is laid out in a set of behavioural criteria, or a shrinking number of physical symptoms.

Ultimately, irrespective of what any whored-out psychiatrist or any stupid DSM will tell you, the choice is always yours. Will the narrative of your life be defined by you or by a marketing representative of a pill-pushing conglomerate? Remember, though, contrary to all the lies you have been told, the pills are not helping you. Just the opposite:

“To cite just one of many possible examples, between 2000 and 2009, the consumption of antidepressants in the OECD countries increased by an average of 60 per cent. No study has shown a decline in the prevalence of depression. Quite the contrary: The suicide rate in Iceland, a country that consumes the highest amount of antidepressants per capita, has been constant for the past 10 years.”

Anti-depressants and other psychotropic drugs are making you sicker and your drug lords richer.

23 thoughts on “DSM-5 As a Gift for the Lazy

  1. Great article on this topic, as usual. Yes, liberals seem to love lapping up the pills. They see it as a means to adjust to complex “postmodern” society. Instead, it robs you of your life, your narrative and your ability to relate to others. As I’ve said, the negative aspects of life ARE your means to grow, to stay healthy and to digest reality better. They are your roughage, without which you become frail, easy to manipulate and prone to various kinds of sickness.

    Here is my story:

    Like

    1. Musteryou – I enjoyed hearing your thoughts in the video about experiencing pain and how the West views this. That was fascinating. Thank you for sharing.

      Like

  2. Its in the best interest of a capitalistic society to have sick individuals. They consume more than healthy ones. Its all about the money.

    Like

  3. “The problem lies not with this particular edition [of the DSM] but with the ideology behind it, which is that mental illness is neurobiological, and that psychosocial factors are not that important.”

    Ultimately everything going on in the brain is ‘neurobiological.’ What people don’t understand is that ‘neurobiological’ doesn’t mean ‘impervious to outside influences other than drugs.’ We need to stop pretending that ‘psychosocial’ and ‘neurobiological’ reflect two different realms of existence with no interaction between them, when in fact your neurotransmitters and stress hormones and anything else ‘biological’ are constantly attuned to the environment, and in turn influence how you’ll respond to it.

    There’s always this false dichotomy between ‘biological’ and ‘environmental’, where the former is meant as ‘unchangeable’ and the other as ‘easily changed.’ No, not at all. For one thing, people’s biology and the expression of their genes are always in interaction with the environment (environment can be something as broad as society and as narrow as neighboring cells in the body); and environmental influences aren’t ‘easily changed’ – they can be extremely hard to undo.

    Like

  4. A friend of mine who always hated his job but was too scared to make a change, takes 2 antidepressants plus an anti-anxiety medication, and maybe more, to tolerate said job. Without insurance drugs would cost $1K, that is one thousand USDs per month — plus the cost of the medical visits to administrate it all. Is utterly convinced that these drugs “save his life.” Alleges would commit suicide without.

    Like

      1. It is some really deep problem. Does not consider self qualified for any other job except a minimum wage job, and cannot afford to live on minimum wage. The idea of not being qualified for another job (maybe, not wanting a different kind of job? I don’t know) is the neurotic part.

        Like

          1. No, moving is not one of the things he is willing to do (you can tell I am frustrated with the discussion since there are so many noes.)

            Like

            1. I don’t know. It’s screwed up. Being on drugs is no life and the longer you are on them the less you will be able to gather the will to change. Suicide row.

              Like

  5. In the US we have a real problem with the idea that you need to work on yourself. We’d rather just take pills and then pretend that’s all we need. Our culture does not encourage soul-searching, and the time period in the mid-to-late 20th century when psychological analysis was at its height is now seen as an amusing anomaly and even a mistake. It’s true that a lot of people just seemed to stay as bad as ever no matter how long they spent on the psychiatrist’s couch talking about their childhood, but you can’t get rid of endemic problems that infect the culture as a whole in a few decades’ time.

    Like

    1. America’s problem is consumerism and the way that has penetrated the deepest parts of the mind. The logic of consumerism is to get as much benefit as you can for the least possible expenditure. Those who do spend a lot of time on themselves are deemed stupid. A quick fix is considered smart because expenditure is reduced. That is also why Americans shout stupid things at each other on YouTube without listening. To shout loudly conveys the urgency of your message and it a short-cut to asserting dominance. The content of your message doesn’t matter – its the ability to create an explosion and draw attention to your…. explosion.

      Like

  6. It is going to be interesting when the child you will not name Tamerlan gets to school and you and he interface with all these people on ADHD medication.

    Like

    1. We are a college town and the kids who go to our only school are all kids of people like me. I’ve been to that school and all kids are very smart, normal and just simply great. And there is even a cultural diversity, which is a very big deal for a self-insulating suburb.

      Like

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.