• We are a multilingual website again. Read the notice about this.
  • Understand AI use at MyPTSD: all AI use is explained in our AI help page. AI use is by choice here. It exists if you want it, but does nothing unless you choose to use it.

Calling Troll On New Posters

Status
Not open for further replies.
I dont understand how these people operate. I am desperately afraid of being wrong in my selfdiagnosis, which hopefully wont remain one much longer. I was in a situation where I needed to find out what first step to make because I was truly backed into the corner. Nobody believed me, I was confused, and after years I got slapped with an ADHD diagnosis and suggested I "start from there." :mad: Was done with it then, and knew I needed more information before somebody would take me seriously or I could express myself. Thats where my need for a "temporary self diagnosis" comes from.

What I found out in learning about PTSD changed everything for me. Every second day I get hot flashes of "PTSD. You are so, so ridicoulus. Dumb hypochondriac. You are embarressing yourself in your search for martyrdom and redemption. Instead of whining just stop being pathetic." which can only be quenched by extensive research and the assurance that yes, after 8 long years, I am finally on the right track.
 
Not sure why anyone who has cancer would want feedback on a cancer board from someone who has no cancer diagnosis but experiences cancer symptoms. I know I don't.

I think this is an important point, and I think the issue is more complicated than it seems.

The first source of complexity is that the symptoms of PTSD are all extreme versions of normal experiences. Everyone has nightmares, everyone has thoughts they don't like, and unpleasant memories.

Criterion A is important, because there are chemical changes that occur in the brain when we are convinced that we are about to die that impact memory and the structure of the brain.

What I think anonymous is saying, is that while 'having PTSD' isn't 'membership of an exclusive club', there is some value in treating this forum as an exclusive club, and excluding people who can't make a meaningful contribution. It's an uncomfortable thought, particularly for those of us (like me) who want to help everybody. I think it does have merit, though.

There's also the 'comforting label' factor - I think it is in the interest of those who would be helped to get a professional diagnosis & professional treatment. I think it's a very good thing that this forum is not (primarily) about providing sympathy, it's primarily about pushing for therapeutic outcomes.

If we accept those things, then the problem is working out if and how to exclude people. (Once again, I can't say this enough, I support the current system - I am not advocating change, I am discussing it.) Conducting an amateur diagnosis (for instance, by asking about criterion A) doesn't seem very helpful to me. I think that it's more likely to be in the interest of the forum to do a lot of what already happens - to actively sell the benefits of therapy, and make it clear that if you want to be accepted as a sufferer in this forum, you'd better have some stories to tell about your therapist(s).

When I'm asking if someone has CritA in their history? I usually assume some version of the above. I don't actually want to be pissed off. Not that I wish them terrible things in their lives. More that I'm hoping it's some from column A (education needed) & some from column B (you are here, are you in the right class?). I don't want this disorder. I don't think anyone here does. It f*cking sucks. Trying to find out what's wrong with you? I think most of us have walked that path. Trying to claim a disorder that clearly in no way fits, because it's sexy/ well publicized/ whatever? Drives me a bit nuts.

I felt really uncomfortable reading that post, and it seems to be an 'elephant in the room' when it comes to this whole conversation. I guess the really direct way that I might respond to it is this: "You being driven nuts is your problem, and doesn't give you a right to engage in intimidating and hostile behaviour." But I feel really uncomfortable saying that, because I don't think it really helps, all I think it does is inflame. That said, I know that the habit I learned elsewhere of laying out arguments so that the other person loses their temper and I can be seen as reasonable (trolling) isn't going to be tolerated here - I can also see that it wouldn't be helpful either.

I think that FridayJones and Anonymous are making points that deserve a considered and direct response, but I'm quite scared, and am kinda hoping that someone else might give it a try.
 
@anthony My concern then regarding the ICD 11, would this not then allow a possibility for someone to actually claim PTSD as an arguable cause for diminished responsibility. From a criminal defense standpoint? I sure hope not.

I have done some shitty things when I have been struggling with anxiety/depression. Yet I also know that I made bad choices that made poor behaviour easier to do. When I still drank alcohol, I had a standing rule with myself. If I was feeling unstable, I stayed off the sauce. But at the end of the day, if I found myself in some kind of trouble. Ultimately it was my own dumb fault. Probably because I failed to follow my own rule.

Fortunately I never did anything to get myself into any legal trouble. But I have burned a few bridges, being a drunken asshole. Still, my fault.

I just don't want to find myself lumped in with the homicidal spree killers, having to hide my condition for fear of being branded as a potential homicidal lunatic timebomb. Ready to massacre thousands because some jerk cut me off at a traffic yield somewhere.

Anyways, I don't totally understand it all. I have not taken the time to read through all of the literature regarding this. I will try to get to it tonight if I can.
 
I felt really uncomfortable reading that post, and it seems to be an 'elephant in the room' when it comes to this whole conversation. I guess the really direct way that I might respond to it is this: "You being driven nuts is your problem, and doesn't give you a right to engage in intimidating and hostile behaviour." But I feel really uncomfortable saying that, because I don't think it really helps, all I think it does is inflame. That said, I know that the habit I learned elsewhere of laying out arguments so that the other person loses their temper and I can be seen as reasonable (trolling) isn't going to be tolerated here - I can also see that it wouldn't be helpful either.

I do not see how asking a straightforward & simple question : "Do you have Criterion A trauma in your history?" ... Is engaging in intimidating and hostile behavior.

Heck... I even cut and past the definition directly from the DSMV so no one has to be embarrassed by asking what that is, or go to the trouble themselves of looking it up and wading through information. Unlike asking someone on a parenting forum if they're a parent, Criterion A is pretty specific technical jargon. Parents know they're parents. Everyone knows what that word means. But not even all seasoned PTSD peeps know what Criterion A is, or if they do what it includes outside of their specific trauma. It's both a kindness, and a shortcut.
 
I just don't want to find myself lumped in with the homicidal spree killers, having to hide my condition for fear of being branded as a potential homicidal lunatic timebomb. Ready to massacre thousands because some jerk cut me off at a traffic yield somewhere.

I can understand that. I think it's one reason why people diagnose CPTSD when DID would probably be a more accurate diagnosis. I tell people that I have PTSD, I don't talk about DID. (My therapist has never said the words "You have dissociative identity disorder" to me. When I pointed this out to him, he said "OK, but we have talked a lot about dissociation, and about identity." Another complicating factor when it comes to DID treatment is that telling a patient with DID that they have DID may cause them to adjust their behaviour to match their diagnosis - not a good outcome. He has written 'PTSD' on a number of official forms and communications... this shit ain't simple.)
 
@BlueOrange - I don't think @FridayJones or Anonymous' responses were in any way hostile or intimidating. I have found that most people here when questioning someone about Crit A go out of their way to try and do so in a friendly caring way. Along the lines of @FridayJones' "are you in the right class?' question. Not in a "You shouldn't be here - bugger off" tone.

The other thing that makes me want to :banghead: is the idea that this is all subjective. Oh, you personally are devastated by your boyfriend leaving you so for you that is the same as suffering CSA or rape or experiencing combat. I don't accept that. To me, the physical nature of PTSD is important. I'm not a doctor but it makes sense to me that being constantly in flight/fight/freeze mode causes changes to the physical brain and to the immune system, the gut etc etc. That is just NOT the same as being very very upset.
 
@FridayJones Fair point.

I'm running on recollections of being upset upwards of a year ago, and I'm not convinced that I'm being rational about all this. I felt threatened by your post earlier in this thread because I haven't done anything that you've listed, and while I don't give a damn about the diagnostic club, I do give a damn about the forum community that really is a sort of club. The threat that I perceive doesn't seem to be real when analysed, and I don't fully trust my responses right now. Describing my fear as unreasonable (I'm the one doing that) hasn't stopped me from being frightened though.
 
Last edited:
My concern then regarding the ICD 11, would this not then allow a possibility for someone to actually claim PTSD as an arguable cause for diminished responsibility. From a criminal defense standpoint?
People have tried claiming PTSD as a legal precedence for injury sustained, however; a mental health diagnosis is not evidenced and proven beyond a reasonable doubt, compared to physical health and its associated tests that measure something physical, giving a conclusive result, even if inconclusive, as that is a conclusive negative.

You read about them often in the news, and to date, not a one has succeeded in proving PTSD for diminished capacity to commit the crime. People have used it as part of their defence, attributing their actions to part PTSD, but unfortunately PTSD does not cater to psychotic or such episodes... the person would have to be diagnosed with something far more aggressive that does meet a legal psychological incapacity. PTSD does not, at this time.
 
not a one has succeeded in proving PTSD for diminished capacity to commit the crime.

Good. Here's hoping it stays that way.

I am hardly an expert, but I know there is a massive difference between a panic attack and a psychotic episode.

Hmm: Just about went off on a bit of a tangent there. Was tempted to leave it in. But I would just be repeating myself. Only with more swear words. Ha.
 
@BlueOrange, I personally view the criterion A discussion like this--asking someone whether they have a severe / catastrophic trauma that is based around the severity for PTSD, is like outlined by others, "are you in the right class" type question.

I take no offence when someone comes here and is honest, saying they just have anxiety, were bullied a little in school, so forth, and admit they don't have PTSD, but need support by people who understand. No worries with that. This community is the largest in the world for trauma, so people may use it for things that are not befitting of PTSD, but close to. I don't have issue, personally, providing people are open and honest, and those who aren't here with such severe trauma don't make a life choice to be part of this community with what is, in essence to those with PTSD here, trivial life issues. Whilst not trivial to them, they are in the scope of PTSD severity trauma. Honesty, openness, then leave, for anything less than PTSD severity trauma.

I say PTSD severity trauma because there are plenty of people here without diagnosis, awaiting, self-diagnosed, so forth, but their underlying trauma is of the severity and type that does cause PTSD. We are a combined PTSD / trauma community, as one creates the other, though our focus is at that severity and intensity of catastrophic level trauma.

When someone comes here claiming they have PTSD, told or self-diagnosed, from a relationship breakdown, cheating spouse, so forth, and when asked if they have other trauma in their history and answer, "no," it honestly comes back to that attitude of diminishing those here who do meet actual PTSD criterion from that level of severe trauma endured. Whilst a relationship breakdown or cheating spouse can be devastating to a person, it still doesn't come close to being raped, tortured, going to war, beaten within an inch of your life, et cetera. Comparing a cheating spouse to living through a tornado and near being killed by flying projectiles, your house disappearing around you, and such, is really to piss on all of us here who have experienced severe, catastrophic trauma.

If someone said to me, "I have PTSD from a cheating spouse," I would say, "no, you do not. Is there other trauma in your history, such as child abuse, accidents, so forth, that you have told your physician, other than just a cheating partner?"

If that answer was no, then I would tell them they're in the wrong place and to get another opinion, as they've been duped down the wrong path.

Some people have answered that question with prior trauma in their history, as I would outline to them then, that is what they have been diagnosed with PTSD from, and their cheating spouse is just the icing on the cake that has broken them. That is the truth based on current diagnostic standards for diagnosis for PTSD, whether ICD or DSM.

Me, nor anyone else here, or in the world, get to make-up their own diagnoses and tell people they have something without some type of scrutinised, assessed, peer review process. Mental health is rife with this issue because most of it is based on best guess from statistical analysis, observation and peer discussion, compared to medical health, being able to take and analyse a sample, obtaining quantified results to derive an outcome. Mental health is far from that level of accuracy, and whilst screening assessments are constantly getting better within mental health, the reliance on the patient giving accurate answers is the gaping hole in the process.

It's like a whole lot of recent reading into personality disorders I've done... and the #1 issue is that when screened, most people with personality disorders know which answers to choose based on what they view as those around them who are considered normal, because they're typically trying to beat the test from the get go, especially sociopaths. Basically, mental health screening is poor compared to physical health screening.

I believe if we start telling people they have PTSD from things that aren't listed in the spectrum, then we're just becoming part of the problem, instead of part of the solution to provide as accurate information as possible, without lying or deceiving people. I'm big on honesty and the truth.
 
Last edited:
I say PTSD severity trauma because there are plenty of people here without diagnosis, awaiting, self-diagnosed, so forth, but their underlying trauma is of the severity and type that does cause PTSD. We are a combined PTSD / trauma community, as one creates the other, though our focus is at that severity and intensity of catastrophic level trauma.

I've been watching this thread and trying to come up with a good way to say this. Now I don't have to. I'll just steal it ;)

At least a couple of previous posts discuss excluding undiagnosed people. Obviously this would effect me personally, but beyond myself, there are many folks here without access to somebody who could diagnose them- financial reasons, a shortage of specialists in their geographical area, etc. etc. Then there are those who are afraid of doctors and mental health professionals, those who are unable to speak their story, most likely those who are unable to leave their homes altogether.

Yeah, you could have a small exclusive community just the same as a broad sweeping one, but I think that's ignoring a significant portion of the utility of this site. I will speak from my own experience now- if you had asked me in December if I have problems with dissociating or if I had ptsd I would have looked at you like your head was on fire. Of course not. My understanding of those things was so far removed from anything I believed about my own life that I also half discounted my own husband's existing diagnosis. I well understand why it was given to him, but I looked at it more as a situation in which they stuffed him into what came closest to fitting, not necessarily what was accurate. In my mind ptsd="shell shock". That's it. Neither of us have been in combat. How could it possibly be applicable. Similarly, I've said this somewhere before, but dissociation to me meant "multiple personalities". That's it. Also not applicable to me.

Then my therapist opened my eyes to the concept of dissociation as it does apply to me, which then led me here. And this site has taught me about severe trauma and its effects. I have never encountered so many people talking about these things that I have always experienced and hidden from others because honestly, I felt like a defective freak. I'm not trying to be dramatic, but it has been a paradigm altering experience. My world will never be the same. :p And I think that it's an extremely useful tool for others like me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Donation drives

2026 Donation Goal

Goal
$1,800.00
Earned
$910.00
This donation drive ends in
0 hours, 0 minutes, 0 seconds
  50.6%

Trending content

Featured content

Back
Top Bottom