The American Psychiatric Association (APA) is coming out
with a fifth version of their Diagnostic
and Statistic Manual of Mental Disorders in May 2013. The DSM manuals play
a significant role in how medical professionals diagnose and classify
disorders. For example, the APA declassified homosexuality as a mental disorder
in the 70’s. The evolution of the DSM is demonstrative of the how humans attempt
to understand themselves over time.
The newest manual, DSM-5, is said to be making a lot of
changes to the previous DSM-IV published in 2000 (not to mention the change from
Roman to Arabic numerals). I recently came across an article from Psychology Today that talked about how
the diagnostic criteria for Borderline Personality Disorder are going to change
in the DSM-5 (http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/here-there-and-everywhere/201112/borderline-personality-disorder-big-changes-in-the-dsm-5).
This article caught my attention because
one of my best friends was diagnosed with BPD in 2011. My friend strongly
disagreed with her diagnosis and refused to see that psychiatrist ever again on
the basis that he was sexist and that BPD is a fancy guise for misogyny (for which
is has been historically targeted by some feminists).
Because of my friend’s strong reaction to her diagnosis I
began to research BPD. I of course was researching the criteria for BPD as classified
by the DSM-IV. As the article put forth, the DSM-IV breaks down the criteria
for BPD as having five or more of the following nine criteria:
1. Fear and/or “frantic” avoidance of “real or
imagined” abandonment.
2.
Relationships with people that they idealize or
devalue.
3.
Unstable sense of self.
4.
Impulsiveness.
5.
Suicidal or self-harming behavior.
6.
Unstable and changing moods often based on
reaction.
7.
“Chronic feelings of emptiness.”
8.
Experienced anger that is uncontrolled, intense,
or inappropriate.
9.
Paranoid thinking based on stress or
dissociative symptoms.
Not being a medical professional attending to my friend I
could not account for 3, 7, and 9. I do think, however, that my friend’s
behavior fit the other criteria almost as if she were a textbook example. She
had in fact spoken to me about 1, 2, 6, and 8 without any knowledge that these
issues were related to BPD and, I believe, not really having any idea of what
BPD is beyond the fact that women are more likely to be diagnosed.
Being friends with someone who has BPD or at least fits the
criteria can be difficult. For example, I would never tell her that I
researched BPD to better understand her behavior because she might then believe
me to be a horrible person (DSM-IV criteria #2). With the DSM-5 I wondered if
she still would fit the criteria at all or if she would maybe be an even better
match. With the DSM-5, rather than
having to fit five out of nine criteria like with the DSM-IV, the patient would
have to fit all of the five criteria that are broader. These criteria are
broken down into more specific examples that the patient may or must meet in order
to diagnose. The criteria for BPD of 2013, paraphrased and without inclusion of specific
examples and explanations, are:
1.
Personality that is impaired in functioning by self-functioning
EITHER by identity OR self-direction, AND by interpersonal-functioning EITHER
by empathy or intimacy.
2.
Pathological personality traits in the realms of
Negative affectivity (characterized by ANY of the following: emotional lability,
anxiousness, separation insecurity, depressivity) AND Disinhibition (characterized
by ANY of the following: impulsivity and risk-taking) AND Antagonism (characterized
by antagonism).
3.
Impairments of personality functioning are
consistent.
4.
Impairments are not more likely stemming from
environment or “stage of development.”
5.
Impairments are not results of a substance or
general medical condition.
The main difference I notice between the DSM-5 and DSM-IV
are causality. DSM-IV did not account for what may be causing certain behaviors
in a person (3 through 5). It also seems like the nine criteria from the DSM-IV
were addressed in the DSM-5 first two criteria. Furthermore, rather than being
diagnosable with some criteria, BPD diagnosis will now require specific criteria
to be met, but allows them to be met in different ways. I think the new model
of qualification alone better fits how an individual reacts to medical issues in
general. With mental disorders (versus something like a flu virus) I can only
imagine that it is extremely difficult to distinguish between behavior unique
to an individual and behavior unique to a disorder.
As far as my friend goes under the DSM-5 I feel like she is a
textbook example for the first two criteria the same way she was for DSM-IV
criteria. But, with the very thorough breakdown of criteria, I feel like BPD is
more accurately explained and a more specific kind of impairment in personality.
For example, interpersonal-functioning issues with intimacy further explained
how a patient might idealize and devalue a person in their life by becoming
over-involved or withdrawing from that person. I, led by what I thought to be
spot on descriptions of my friend, was again convinced she should reconsider her
BPD diagnosis (though, again, I would never tell her).
But the DSM-5 gave me something to think about with the last
three criteria about causality. I was once again reminded that I am not in the
least qualified to agree or disagree with what disorder my friend may have. In
fact, my believing that she did have BPD may have led me to draw conclusions
about her behavior that were not true or only consistent because I wanted them
to be (DSM-5 number 3). One thing that feminists have said about BPD is that it
is often confused with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, a diagnosis my friend
more readily accepts (DSM-5 number 4). She also is taking what I consider to be
quite the cabinet full of medications (DSM-5 number 5). The more I thought
about it, the more I realized I should stop thinking about it at all; I needed
to stop playing psychiatrist and stick to being a friend.
I don’t regret researching BPD because in my search for
understanding probably saved our friendship, or, more specifically, kept me
from doing what she told me she always fears I will: abandon her. But what the
DSM-5 brought to my attention was that a disorder causes symptoms that are not
always caused by that disorder. That and leave the diagnoses to the
professionals.
No comments:
Post a Comment