Medical Genital exam as a child.. QUESTIONS

[Justmehere]

At the end of the day, you are in distress, not able to do what you want to do, and getting help to sort this out is key, from a therapist who can talk this through with you.

The good news is that it’s very unlikely the PTSD diagnosis was accurate, but professionals need to sort that out.

That doesn’t mean your struggle now is less legit. It’s common for people to come here and get pissed at the possibility they don’t have PTSD when frankly, most people with PTSD would be delighted they don’t have the disorder.

In fact, most people who go through even Criterion A trauma don’t have PTSD. Relationship issues alone are not enough to warrant the diagnosis. PTSD isn’t a badge of honor or the only way to validate the past was indeed horrible. (I’m not sure why people come here so adamant that they do have an incurable mental illness as if it’s a good thing. Anyhow...)

Medical care can bring up a lot of intense feelings and this common experience led you to believe certain things about yourself that are not accurate. It’s influencing your relationships and leading you to ask questions about what is normal and not.

You are asking good questions to see what is normal and not.

A doctor examining genitals with parent consent is different than consensual sexual contact. Somewhere, your brain equated both experiences with being violated, when that’s really unlikely to be accurate.

There are also some complicated areas in medical care to sort out as to if they were normal or not that have to do with the context of the experience. If the doctor was a podiatrist, something is wrong. That’s not normal. Foot doctors don’t need to examine genitals. Pediatrician or family doctor doing a physical, then it’s extremely unlikely this is trauma. If it happened in a doctors office vs a car, etc...

Parental consent doesn’t always eliminate the possibly of a problem. Dr. Larry Nasser molested a number of girls right in front of their parents, sometimes with uninformed consent for what he was doing. If you were 4 years old, that’s one thing... if you were 16 and said no, and your mom and the doc said yes and did it anyhow without a legit emergency... that’s different. That’s screwed up.

On its surface, what the doc did seems normal, and this is thankfully extremely unlikely to be sexual abuse and PTSD. You may instead be struggling with self image, anxiety and sexuality. These are not light issues to sort out and carry enough weight of their own to warrant talking to a counselor or therapist about it and your relationships now.

 

[Muttly]

@Friday I am not sure I completely follow what you are saying (my brain isn't working great today). I am certainly not asking you to not answer questions or not speak your truth. And I am not saying, we shouldn't explain what is PTSD and what meets the criterion or not. Hoping I didn't give offense?

 

[siniang]

PTSD isn’t a badge of honor or the only way to validate the past was indeed horrible. (I’m not sure why people come here so adamant that they do have an incurable mental illness as if it’s a good thing. Anyhow...)

I think partly it's because we as humans love labels. We love boxes. We love when we can take something, e.g. certain symptoms or feelings, and neatly put them in a specific box with a specific label. In the context of mental health disorders it confirms us that we're not "crazy", not just making things up or being lazy or wallow in self-pity. It validates what we're feeling, it puts all different puzzle pieces we might be dealing with into context - things might finally start making sense. After years of struggling, suffering, and looking for answers, getting a diagnosis is almost like a kind of closure, while opening the door for treatment, for the hope of finally getting better. Many people don't even know they're actually suffering from a mental disorder, resulting in them constantly wondering, constantly questioning themselves, how it's so hard for them to function in society, to be "normal". So yes, getting a diagnosis can be a relief.

In very rare cases it might be Munchausen Syndrome.

(I feel somewhat addressed by this ? That's why I wanted to offer that perspective/thoughts)

 

[Kubash16]

Do we already have an article we can link people to about why it’s so important to have an accurate diagnosis? Or about why PTSD has as tight of a criteria as it currently does? If not, I could write it.

 

[Justmehere]

(I feel somewhat addressed by this ? That's why I wanted to offer that perspective/thoughts)

To be clear, my comments were not about your situation. It’s totally ok to post your thoughts - we are all peers here - and I would like to clarify my comment was addressed to the OP and about the general trend that I have seen a percentage of people do get very upset to find out it’s not PTSD because they feel this means their suffering isn’t legit unless they have the diagnosis of the very specific condition of PTSD, when that’s just not true. Suffering can be very real and very legit without the specific condition of PTSD.

The condition of PTSD has a unique quality to it that it is somewhat seen as this romanticized label and yet other mental health conditions are not nearly as idealized.

A percent of people act like suffering isn’t suffering unless it’s PTSD.

Forums for schizophrenia and bipolar disorder don’t see as many people clamoring for the diagnosis and pissed off as if they as a person have been invalidated to find out it might not be the right condition for their symptoms. It’s somewhat unique to PTSD that such a high percent of people build up a how-dare-you-attitude when it’s suggested they could be suffering from a different but equally difficult disorder. PTSD isn’t the only condition that can be linked to trauma.

Do labels and a diagnosis have a benefit? Sure. To a limited degree it can be helpful to finding effective solutions and tools for symptoms. Which is why it’s important to sort out what is the proper diagnosis with the proper trained professionals.

 

[siniang]

Thank you!

My apologies, I didn't mean to imply that your comment was addressed at me, directly, I just recognized myself in the general umbrella statement, that's all.

I think it has to do with stigma. For example, Bipolar disorder, like depression, has a very negative stigma to it. It has the suicidal component to it (I don't think many people who don't actually have to deal with PTSD are aware that suicidality is an actual and very real symptom of PTSD). It's probably also the stigma that with PTSD, because it's correlated to trauma, there is this underlaying assumption that it's not your personal fault, whereas with depression or bipolar or similar disorders, it's somehow "you". Of course that is stupid, but people, particularly with a lack of understanding, are stupid. Ok, let's rephrase it: they're ignorant.

Of course that's not how it is and I absolutely don't mean to imply that I think it's like this, please don't get me wrong. But you're right, PTSD somehow has a romanticizing to it, among the general public (I'm not sure if it stems from the original association with war veterans - which are highly honored and romanticized in some cultures)

There has been a lot of increased awareness with mental health topics over the past years, but there still is a long way to go, unfortunately.

 

[Justmehere]

Yeah. I can see the connection to trying to wrestle through the stigma of other conditions and how PTSD is seen by well meaning folks as a way to prove the condition isn’t their fault.

There are even those that take it to the extreme to try to use PTSD to escape personal responsibility for everything from dumbassery to abuse of others.

PTSD is linked to trauma, but so are other mental health conditions and that get lost in the mix. When I risk telling health care providers I have it, it’s the disorder where people (the public and uninformed providers alike) then ask intimate questions about the worst thing that’s happened to you. What’s the trauma? How bad was it? Why won’t you answer? Then they assume you are more likely to be violent and an addict and on and on. (All ignorant.)

When my friend with an ED and bipolar disorder tells people about her condition she gets a different flavor of crap and stigma. They don’t ask about the worst thing in her life but they go other devaluing places.

Not really better or worse. All crappy.

It’s important to untangle these issues and get to the heart of what is going on first, then figure out the next steps, independent from needs of validation of self and relief from shame.

Mental illness isn’t an excuse to do stupid things or be a jerk. But it’s equally true no one has any cause to be ashamed they have a mental illness. It is what it is. Like diabetes or MS. The diagnosis is simply a tool to find ways to get better and manage the best one can. That’s all.

 

[siniang]

Criterion A: stressor (one required)

The person was exposed to: death, threatened death, actual or threatened serious injury, or actual or threatened sexual violence, in the following way(s):

• Direct exposure
• Witnessing the trauma
• Learning that a relative or close friend was exposed to a trauma
• Indirect exposure to aversive details of the trauma, usually in the course of professional duties (e.g., first responders, medics)

I have a question. I'm not sure if this is the right place, so my apologies, but since the criteria were brought up, here, I'll just go ahead. Please delete if inappropriate, here.

I'm wondering whether someone has to be aware of the actual event or threat or whether that could happen subconsciously, without them consciously realizing the potential of the extent of the specific threat. For example if someone was assaulted without actual physical consequences (threat of serious injury, possibly death or sexual violence?) and they don't realize the "what could've been" (subconscious denial?), could PTSD still develop from the potential of such threat? Or someone almost drowned or was in an otherwise life-threatening situation (threat of death) but they didn't realize how dangerous it actually was? I guess that would be avoidance, but could avoidance be part of the actual trauma? Do you know what I mean?

 

[Kubash16]

I would say yes- for instance a child molested but repeatedly told “its okay, it’s just our thing that others don’t understand.” That child likely doesn’t have any idea of the consequences of what’s happening or that it’s wrong, etc.

 

[Justmehere]

For example if someone was assaulted without actual physical consequences (threat of serious injury, possibly death or sexual violence?) and they don't realize the "what could've been" (subconscious denial?), could PTSD still develop from the potential of such threat?

If I understand what you are asking, I think the answer is yes. Our bodies react even when our brains haven’t consciously processed it yet.

Assault, “almost drowning.” etc, depending on the specific factors could lead to the development of PTSD. They can also lead to other mental health conditions or no condition at all.

 

[siniang]

Thank you! The example of the molested child who's been told that it's fine and who can't understand the extent of the action just yet, makes sense.

Trying to re-phrase it. In one of the threads I read the other day that PTSD can develop even if the event, objectively, wasn't as severe and that what matters is how you felt at that moment. I.e. an assault wasn't actually severe, but the person genuinely feared for their health, even life, at that moment and that can lead to PTSD (which kinda is touching a little bit on the experience of OP?). I guess I was wondering about the opposite, i.e. an event had the potential of being or even was severe, but the person experiencing it didn't realize the extent and didn't feel threatened or any fear.

So yes, basically that part:

Our bodies react even when our brains haven’t consciously processed it yet.

 

[Justmehere]

Yeah. I see what you are saying.

The diagnostic criteria actually do not define criterion A trauma as any situation where one fears for their lives or feels xyz way at the time of the event for good cause. It’s not based on the at-the-time feelings about an event, but the event itself.

The kiddo I was babysitting yesterday acted like he was dying because he didn’t get ice cream for breakfast. Now will he get PTSD because he felt terrified he wasn’t getting ice cream? Well. No. That’s silly. (And I’m using a silly example on purpose.) He screamed bloody murder when getting a shot at the doctor. Will he get PTSD from a shot? No. He might have a mild fear of shots, but that’s not PTSD. (And this situation might be most like the OP’s situation. Fear of intimacy because of a an awkward experience regarding medical exam of genitals.)

If a kid gets bullied and physically beaten up by other kids at school, and shrugs it off at the time, because of whatever reason, he would still be at risk for PTSD.

And the diagnosis isn’t just the event in the past but the symptoms in the here and now.