Hey. Nice to meet you, I hope you decide to stick around :-)

> Mental disorder? Hmmm.

Lol! I can't say much because I'm supposed to be working but I saw that and my little beady eyes lit up!

:-)

There are indeed problems around whether there is a non-arbitrary line to be drawn between neurological disorders on the one hand and psychiatric (or mental) disorders on the other. One might think that 'mental' disorders would be disorders of cognitive processes but here are two problem cases for that highly intuitive view:

- Tourette's is classified as a psychiatric disorder even though the essential feature of Tourette's is tics which is surely a motor problem rather than a cognitive problem. So... Current DSM taxonomy seems to be over-inclusive...

- Cortical blindness is a disorder of a paradigmatically cognitive or mental process (vision) and yet cortical blindness is currently classified as a neurological condition rather than a psychiatric condition. So... Current DSM taxonomy seems to be under-inclusive...

Whats to be done??? Revise in the name of consistency IMHO!

The current distinctions between mental illness and non-mental illnes, and mental illness and 'problems in living' is tricky... They are problems, basically.

One thought on the latter would be to move from the current categorical (either you are mentally ill or you are not mentally ill) to a dimensional approach (it is normal to have certain traits it is just the *degree* that is problematic). If they moved to the latter approach (which is thought to be more realistic in the case of personality disorders in particular) then they will still need to set an arbitrary threshold to determine who gets health insurance to pay for treatment, however. Sigh.

Current DSM categories are *descriptions* of behavioural symptoms. Even the cognitive symptoms have behavioural measures... It is purely descriptive. The DSM doesn't distinguish between someone meeting criteria for a reading disorder on the basis of inner malfunciton and someone meeting criteria for a reading disorder on the basis of nobody ever having tried to teach them to read! Both are equally mentally ill according to the DSM!

What that means is that... All it takes for the DSM to categorise you as having a mental disorder is for you to meet behavioural criteria for however long is necessary.

The current categories are hopelessly inadequate too. I calculated the other day that there are 256 different ways in which one can meet the diagnostic criteria for borderline personality (on the basis that one needs to have 5 or 6 or 7 or 8 or 9 of the symptoms in order to qualify thus you can work out the possible combinations of symptoms...) There is often more variability between people of the same diagnostic category than there is between people of different diagnostic categories.

And yet... Diagnostic categories are still often the unit for research instead of the humble symptom! On the basis of diagnostic category they try and figure your chances of improvement or they deliver their life-long sentence or they reccomend a particular brand of treatment...

Okay. Ending rant now.

Just wanted to say... Don't worry what you do or don't meet what that does or does not mean. Don't let them dictate your future. Don't let them sit you down for a heart to heart of 'what is wrong with you'. Unless... You need something from your health insurance, of course ;-)

> they don't differentiate between mind and emotion - they are not the same thing. So you can have a very damaged feeling-life, and i think mine is, but have an OK or even a more than OK mental life. I'm a good thinker, a good writer, stuff like that.

Ah.
:-)
There is this little theory that goes like this:
Thoughts cause Emotions.
If you are having an intensely distressing emotion then you are endorsing a cognitive distortion. By definition. If you won't admit to that then you are *unconsciously* endorsing a cognitive distortion. Ahem... Since the notion of the Freudian unconscious is sometimes taken to be disreputable they say you have an *implicit schema* where a cognitive distortion resides ;-)

But...

Thats not true. It isn't true as a matter of empirical fact. No time to run through the facts...

DBT has this useful distinction between rational mind on the one hand and emotion mind on the other.

I've read about BPD as trouble with mentalising (figuring out others thoughts emotions intentions desires) when the attachment (emotion) system is active. If you google 'mentalization attachment "borderline personality disorder"' you should be able to find some stuff on that, if you like. Might help... Helped me...