Lets Create A Ptsd Diagnosis - Off-topic Discussion

[Friday]

How do you claim that you got drunk and involentarly looked at pictures and videos of real people being slaughtered and now have PTSD?

My addiction made me do it.



ETA... I'm not saying I agree with the logic tree, but here's the logic tree

Addiction > Involuntary > Drunk > Unable to Consent or make reasoned decisions

 

[lostforgottensoul]

Addiction > Involuntary > Drunk > Unable to Consent or make reasoned decisions

I know, im an addict (not alcohol) but nor sure how one could become traumatized to the point of PTSD but getting drunk or whatever and deciding to look at traumatizing things.

I will say that if forced to take a drug thats different BUT that falls under involuntary in my opinion. Just simply getting drunk & looking at the isnt exactly involuntary in my opinion.

Maybe re-word to like something "by force" or something of that nature?

 

[Friday]

but getting drunk or whatever and deciding to look at traumatizing things.

Like getting drunk and deciding to drive?

Kill someone? Boom. Involuntary manslaughter.
Look at traumatizing media? Boom. Involuntary media consumption? = PTSD?

 

[Sideways]

@FridayJones - duh! Yes, 'involuntary' is legally loaded! So's 'coercion'. I'm leading towards non-voluntary. I don't like "forced", because the inclusion was much for the same of children, where actual 'force' isn't really necessary.

Re the cause of them watching the "live recordings": if someone is so messed up that they get hold of material like this, then repeatedly watch it for a long period, I would suggest that whatever messed them up enough to watch it over a long period is going to be the primary diagnosis anyway.

If someone is messed up, and gets into a situation that causes PTSD, that doesn't disentitle them to the diagnosis. Eg. Someone has a psychotic episode and decides they need to chop off their arm with a circular saw. They'd likely have trauma issues from that. Does it really matter if that psychosis was schizophrenia or drug-induced?

The same logic applies to ptsd from viewing what are real and extreme recordings of human suffering, over and over, for a long time. We're starting to cross too far into moral judgement I think to say, "if you did that because you're a junkie, you aren't entitled to the diagnosis".

It's important to remember that we're not talking a few too many graphic news bulletins. Whatever put you there, watching that stuff "frequently and for a prolonged period" is going to mess you up. You don't 'disentitle' women who are raped because they dressed like a hooker and acted like a hooker. Same goes here - this is extreme viewing. You can't not be effected by it, whatever your reason for watching it.

 

[anthony]

ASD & Adjustment Disorder already exist

Reading many different pieces, it seems many an expert tend to think acute stress disorder should be tossed to the wayside, as its pretty much a useless disorder attempting to cater a 4 week span of trauma life. They too note, it often takes longer than that to get a diagnosis. ASD is so rarely used it serves little purpose.

Adjustment disorder I tend to think should be referenced, but then it won't really sync with PTSD symptoms all that much.

 

[Deleted member 28740]

This applies to you too, stay on topic or I will thread ban you. Criterion A i the discussion point, not all other random PTSD aspects.

What member were you referring to in the above posting?

"This is an opportunity to turn everything upside down, if we see fit. Or we try and refine existing content. Or we amend with various unique ideas and solutions."

Now the cut and paste to this "off topic" thread where there is no context to why the poster posted as they did.

OOOOOOOOOPSSSS.

 

[lostforgottensoul]

What member were you referring to in the above posting?

Me.

Now the cut and paste to this "off topic" thread where there is no context to why the poster posted as they did.

OOOOOOOOOPSSSS.

If you read the actual post, i believe i quoted what i was refering to but does it matter? Anthony will use what he sees fit and disregard the rest.

Now this stuff is annoying me, not that that matters much but this "why" shit is hella annoying!

 

[lostforgottensoul]

Reading many different pieces, it seems many an expert tend to think acute stress disorder should be tossed to the wayside, as its pretty much a useless disorder attempting to cater a 4 week span of trauma life.

I found this article that I read most of (about the first half as i dont have time to read it all) about ASD that seems bullshit to toss it!

http://www.ptsd.va.gov/professional/treatment/early/acute-stress-disorder.asp

@anthony and @joeylittle I dont know a whole lot about ASD though im more informed and will research more at work but what are your thoughts on it being toss out?

To me it seems to be an actual disorder and needed for the 'smaller' type of traumas or stressors but I was wondering what your thoughts were as Im not as informed about it as I should be.

 

[joeylittle]

no context to why the poster posted as they did.

If you click the small arrow next to the name of the member that has been quoted - small blue arrow, you should see one next to your name in your piece that I quoted, above.

Everything off-topic, yet of value or purpose at some point, for the diagnostic discussion can go in here.

This is the given purpose of this thread. I added bold to the important part.
There is no reason to take offense or be slighted - lets move on.

 

[Deleted member 28740]

Refining of Criteria A, currently On Topic does not address:

Childhood abuse. Or abuse of others less than death……

Virtual Reality use in training/treatment by military it is now available to the general public. New media (?) that is by definition experiencing and witnessing directly, purpose of device and media that can be used virtually as reality.

 

[Sideways]

@Changeling - my issue is childhood abuse, so by the proposed criteria, I don't have ptsd! Woohoo! I'm healed!

The exercise is not to diminish others suffering, or to say "you haven't got real mental health issues if you don't meet this criteria". There are other trauma disorders, and other disorders outside the 'trauma' cluster that remain relevant & probably in need of similar overhaul.

This exercise, to my understanding, is to better define the core diagnosis of ptsd, which would actually help other trauma related conditions to be looked to more appropriatly.

So, I don't meet this criteria, but I still have a serious trauma condition that requires treatment (dang!).

 

[joeylittle]

Childhood abuse. Or abuse of others less than death……

I think it does not exclude childhood abuse - if a child were to be shaken, beaten, assaulted - any of those could be tied to an immediate threat of death, catastrophic injury, or sexual violence. If a child witnesses a parent or sibling undergoing those things, that would also fit.

Abuse not resulting in death simply needs to create an immediate threat of catastrophic injury - important to remember that the injury need not be sustained, the immediacy of the threat is what is relevant.

Sexual violence is not a narrow description, either. I could say, as an example, being bound and gagged while naked constitutes immediate threat of sexual violence; depending on the details of the circumstance, it could even constitute actual sexual violence.

Is there a more specific aspect of childhood abuse that isn't being addressed? These questions are important.

VR is a tough one. But I think that in case of a soldier being trained on VR, it's certainly work-related. If the images use footage from life as a base, as many of them do, it comes close to being addressed by A2. After that, it's all details.