On a different forum, people were comparing being cheated on and being raped, saying that they were equally traumatic etc.
I explained that being betrayed is not an equivalent to rape, because rape, violence, being in a war zone etc. are highly traumatic events/situations that threaten your physical integrity, your life and/or your physical health - that the reason rape causes the psyche to suffer so is the threat to or damaging of your body/life/integrity. That, obviously, cheating does not threaten your physical health or integrity in the same way.
I also cited and gave links to both ICD and DSM criteria - that having
"experienced, witnessed, or been confronted with an event or events that involve actual or threatened death or serious injury, or a threat to the physical integrity of oneself or others"
is the first, basic criterion and that this means PTSD can not be diagnosed without this criterion met.
But no, apparently some professor says that being cheated on gives lots of PTSD symptoms and is just as traumatic, and somebody knows somebody who's been diagnosed with PTSD because of events that did not meet this criterion, so let's not bother with DSM and ICD.
It's ridiculous and frustrating that ANYONE would ever compare the two. It's like saying "A tree fell down and hit the grass while we were standing far away, it was as traumatizing as war!" Of course it isn't!
So, upon telling someone I have many symptoms of PTSD:
"Oh, PTSD, did someone cheat on you or were your bicycle stolen?"
Seriously, has anyone been met with that kind of questions? It seems the misconceptions where I live may very lead to that.
I explained that being betrayed is not an equivalent to rape, because rape, violence, being in a war zone etc. are highly traumatic events/situations that threaten your physical integrity, your life and/or your physical health - that the reason rape causes the psyche to suffer so is the threat to or damaging of your body/life/integrity. That, obviously, cheating does not threaten your physical health or integrity in the same way.
I also cited and gave links to both ICD and DSM criteria - that having
"experienced, witnessed, or been confronted with an event or events that involve actual or threatened death or serious injury, or a threat to the physical integrity of oneself or others"
is the first, basic criterion and that this means PTSD can not be diagnosed without this criterion met.
But no, apparently some professor says that being cheated on gives lots of PTSD symptoms and is just as traumatic, and somebody knows somebody who's been diagnosed with PTSD because of events that did not meet this criterion, so let's not bother with DSM and ICD.
It's ridiculous and frustrating that ANYONE would ever compare the two. It's like saying "A tree fell down and hit the grass while we were standing far away, it was as traumatizing as war!" Of course it isn't!
So, upon telling someone I have many symptoms of PTSD:
"Oh, PTSD, did someone cheat on you or were your bicycle stolen?"
Seriously, has anyone been met with that kind of questions? It seems the misconceptions where I live may very lead to that.