What Are The Main Differences Between Ptsd And Complex Ptsd?

[Meadowsweet]

I don't think there is anything wrong in telling it as it is in the UK.

In my area this is not how it is. I have been diagnosed with PTSD, depression and anxiety, and the dissociation I experience is under question. So my experience is that they are extremely careful here about applying diagnostic labels.

Ofcourse everyone has an individual opinion. But I feel that the NHS should use an agreed upon proffessional opinion and be the same service throughout the country.

I don't want to have a different diagnosis depending on what area I live in or who I see. I also need to feel that I can trust the profession that is putting the label on my records. People spend years researching, testing and discussing what goes into the DSM and ICD, how to diagnose it and how to word it.

I'm not saying it's perfect, it will always be a work in progress. But I'd rather have the diagnosis of the profession than of an individual. And whilst the NHS is in my opinion is a godsend compared to the paid for services of other countries, in terms of research (especially into mental health) it is well behind other countries because research is poorly funded.

Whilst I understand that the additional label has helped people accept their condition. In terms of understanding it I can't see how looking up CPTSD is any different than researching PTSD + whichever other disorders are applicable.

 

[anthony]

Whilst I respect some psychiatrists choose to throw this label around as though it is official, even in the UK it isn't. Australian and many other countries have a similar health system that is not all about insurances, however; if you have to apply for disability or any legal Governmental matter, CPTSD cannot be used because there isn't an actual diagnosis.

Regardless of what specific people believe, want to believe, or otherwise, there aren't any actual diagnostic criterion to even be diagnosed with. You cannot be diagnosed with something that has no actual diagnostic criterion.

It doesn't exist, even in the UK. The UK does not have a diagnostic criterion for CPTSD, because I would know about it otherwise considering the resources I access on PTSD.

It doesn't matter what anyone says though, like stated above, some psychiatrist believe in it, thus they use a made-up / self-defined system with zero scope to tell their patients they have something that actually doesn't exist.

Complex trauma is very real. There is only PTSD to date, even in the UK. People in Australia have been diagnosed with CPTSD, but it isn't legal as it has no diagnostic criterion to even be scaled in the first place. End result, when anything goes towards a pension (Government) or insurance / legal matter, the only diagnosis you will find is PTSD, which has an actual legally defined title, symptoms and assessments.

It really is a mute point. People who have complex trauma want recognition. There are some people who treat complex trauma who also believe CPTSD should have legality and recognition, ie. included in the DSM.

End of the day, every single person is legally diagnosed with PTSD, because there are no diagnostic criterion for a diagnosis of CPTSD to even be given, anywhere, globally.

 

[Deleted member 1860]

Curious, does something not exist simply because the government or other power that be does not formally recognize it? Yes, it's all semantics, but looking back at history, it is easy to ascertain the flaw in this black and white mode of thinking.

 

[anthony]

It has nothing to do with Governments, it has to do with the two worlds leading medical / mental health authorities who publish such diagnostic doctrine, which is then the only two accepted legal texts globally. Governments don't get involved, they simply adopt... of which there is the DSM or ICD.

Think of it more in the line of... everyone working of the same sheet of music.

If people were allowed to just create things and make crap up... the mental health field / health field in general, would be in some serious disrepair. One could argue there are already enough issues, without further compiling them with a "anything goes" approach.

 

[Butterflywings]

Sorry Anthony I cannot agree. I work in mental health, and I also have been diagnosed with complex PTSD - by one of the top psychiatrists in the state (talking with colleagues, she is probably the best private psychiatrist in the state and possibly the best altogether in the state). After her diagnosis, I asked her if CPTSD was the same as borderline personality disorder or related to personality disorders at all because of a disagreement I had with a (less educated) colleague who insisted CPTSD = BPD. She said no CPTSD is not BPD or any personality disorder at all. It is merely PTSD of a complex long term nature.

While it is not in the DSM-5, that doesn't mean it's not a real diagnosis. The DSM-5 nowhere links it to personality disorders. The reason it wasn't included in the DSM-5 is because the APA believed CPTSD is just a form of PTSD - much as aspergers is no longer in the DSM-5 as it now falls under autistic spectrum disorder. That does not mean aspergers no longer exists! It just means that for legal purposes someone with aspergers is now described as having ASD, same as someone with CPTSD is legally described as having PTSD. CPTSD is merely a type of PTSD. It in no way means the person has a personality disorder. It just means the nature of their PTSD is that it has been caused by a complex trauma.

Perhaps read up on Judith Herman's works. It's what the better psychiatrists in my state use to explain the difference. Yes there are some ignorant ones out there who think CPTSD is merely a personality disorder, but if you get to know lots of people with CPTSD (as I do professionally), many do not have a personality disorder - those who have a personality disorder do so as a co-morbid disorder.

Really annoys me when people link personality disorders to CPTSD. A person with CPTSD may not be legally able to define it as CPTSD, but they can define it as PTSD according to how the DSM-V views CPTSD and it most certainly is not PTSD with a personality disorder.

 

[Meadowsweet]

I don't see what the problem is regarding PTSD. PTSD is the diagnosis because that's what the diagnostic criteria leads to. Diagnostic criteria kind of regulates professionals to not confuse the heck out of people who are already quite ill mentally.

The problem with CPTSD is that its diagnosis is not regulated. Therefore, one psychiatrist says CPTSD is PTSD + BPD. Another one says it is PTSD + a dissociative disorder. Another says it is PTSD that is from childhood trauma. And altogether it a confusing mash that does nobody any good.

My first therapist had to drop me because she only had experience of single trauma PTSD. She explained it sensitively to me, that the trauma was complex and that because of the dissociative symptoms I had, she was concerned that her lack of experience would destabilise me.

That explanation is something that I am better able to understand than a whole new diagnosis. Also, because the diagnosis isn't officially agreed upon or standardised, it just sends confusing messages.

From a more personal point of view, I have had issues from trauma throughout my life. But i didn't develop the full diagnostic criteria for PTSD until the last attack about 8 years ago. So I see it that I have PTSD from that last attack. But, my issues with trauma, my thinking styles, coping methods (including dissociation) etc came before the PTSD symptoms. So to me, that can't be called CPTSD, because the effects of complex trauma existed before the criteria for PTSD existed.

 

[junglegirl]

As a scientist I would like to point out that the dmv is based on conjecture among social professionals and is not empirically of value. With regard to personality disorders it is easier for the professional to blame the patient for their own incompetence in understanding the nature of torture and trauma. Harvard university which is the number one university in the united states uses cptsd instead of bpd and their neurobiologists on stafff reject bpd as a diagnosis because as I said it is of no scientific value. They employ cptsd in their trauma center and have scientific evidence to back up their theory not pure conjecture which vague personality disorder descriptions seriously fail to achieve.

I find the u.k. to be a lot more honest in their treatment of patients because there is no financial incentive in the diagnosis. In the u.s. the practitioners decide what diagnoses appear in the dsm and these include many incompetent mental health workers not scientists. Harvard scientists and. Other traumatologists fought for cptsd to replace bpd bc they have actually studied the brains of those with trauma and understand now that it is a biological and not a character disorder. I am frankly amazed the u.s. APA has gotten away with their abuse of patients but then again people with complex ptsd have their hands full and cannot pay to have the diagnosis removed as other factions of american society with more money have successfully done.

 

[Deleted member 1860]

I tend to agree with @Meadowsweet on this one. CPTSD isn't regulated and as such, this term can be applied pretty much whenever a practitioner sees fit, instead of based on a set of specific diagnostic criteria. The truth is that we have to fit within the diagnostic criteria, and as it stands now, most of us have a PTSD diagnosis, with some having another diagnosis as well.

I know that I have driven myself bonkers trying to figure out exactly what my diagnosis SHOULD be, as I think that somehow knowing the exact term for what I'm dealing with will somehow help me move forward. But then I realize that beyond the diagnosis of PTSD, it doesn't really matter. There is SO much discord amongst the psychiatric community that arguing over exact terms is just a distraction from healing. I have PTSD, but because my trauma was experienced as such a young child, I'm dealing with symptoms that are beyond PTSD, and unfortunately nobody can seem to decide exactly what it is! I've had one doctor say that I have minimal dissociative symptoms, such that my dissociative tests come back with a level of dissociation that is on par with normal, non-PTSD people. I took the test again when I was actually further along in my healing (and doing better!), and that doctor said that I had a dissociative disorder. No, I don't actually have a dissociative disorder, as dissociation is rare for me outside of being forced to talk about my trauma. The same sort of ambiguity goes for CPTSD and BPD. I've been told a number of times that I have complex PTSD (even though it doesn't officially exist), and I had one doctor diagnose me with BPD erroneously before my trauma was revealed. I haven't been diagnosed with BPD by any practitioner since my trauma was disclosed.

Even now I still think "I need to know exactly what this is called!" But really, I don't. I am working on my healing, and confronting my issues as they come into my awareness. I am not in therapy at the moment, and that is fine with me. I am hesitant to go back into therapy right now as I don't want another label, and I don't want to be pegged into a hole based on what some book says I have. I'm tired of the psychiatric community doing this to me as it isn't very helpful. I am VERY self-aware....and not just by my own opinion, as I've had a number of therapists tell me that I have an incredible amount of insight into my own situation.

I hate to say it, but in the end these are just labels, and while these labels can help us get the correct type of treatment, they can also steer us wrong. I think its more productive to focus on the problematic symptoms and work from there. I know I've had the best luck when approaching my issues in this fashion. I am trying to rest my mind by recognizing that I have PTSD and simply leaving it at that. No matter what the label, I WILL get better, and that's what matters most.

 

[Barberian]

Here is the way I look at it:

Before dictionaries, the way words were spelled were all over the spectrum. With the standardized spelling, it was much easier to learn to read and write. The same with medical texts naming body parts, and last but not least the DSM and ICD. With CPSD we are still in the era before dictionaries - each Dr. or institution is using it's own criteria to make up what CPTSD is or is not. The problem is, we have the dictionary - it's called DSM or ICD.

Until it's included in one or both of those manuals it's the same as me calling my car a "Giddy Up, and Go Machine" or GUGM for short, and arguing with everyone who tries to tell me it's just a car...

 

[junglegirl]

The dsm has removed so called illnesses and disorders at the whim of the public; it is hardly scientific.;)

 

[junglegirl]

@Solara the bottom line is that you should be supported not harmed when seeking help. I have ptsd and I know there is scientific evidence of my illness. I feel for people like my late friend lisa who, like you was diagnosed with bpd and she was not supported and she commited suicide as a result. Therefore I have a strong reaction when people treatthe dsmv a book based on conjecture as scientific truth. It seems to cause a lot of harm and I feel for you. Love yourself and know that you are a human being far more complex than a label. Hugs,
Tatiana

 

[anthony]

@junglegirl I wouldn't call the ICD any better actually, considering it typically follows the DSM. I think you have a lot of bias towards aspects of mental health, both fore and against certain aspects. You can't really slap science as your argument against personality disorders, when the same issue is present for most other mental health. You tend to favour your accepted choices, and dismiss other aspects.

Mental health is young in the scheme of society, has exceptional stigma still and has a long way to go in gaining any scientific basis according to medical science. Social science (psychology) is one of the biggest problem areas in mental health, because people keep arguing for best guess outcomes. Medical science, physiology, is going to be the only real future for anything factual in the mental health field. Otherwise, it will continue to be stigmatised and placed alongside most naturopathic remedies and treatments that have no scientific fact, beyond the placebo effect.

Harvard University is not the authority for mental health, so what their trauma division does, is really of zero relevance overall. There are far better trauma research facilities in the US and around the world, than Harvard University.