DSM IV was really clear about it not being bipolar if med induced. DSM 5 says it is substance induced bipolar but doesn't say it is Bipolar I, which is more serious. There are two main reasons, besides just wanting to be understood properly, that I would argue against this diagnosis and for Major Depression. One is that he is hyper cautious about the possibility of mania, when only one has ever happened and I'm over 50. Therefore he under treats depression, which he is less fearful of. But I suffer more from severe depression in an ongoing almost lifetime way that is sometimes suicidal. A short manic episode induced by overdoing meds seems a tiny thing in comparison. And we have used anti-depressants since then with no bad effects so you'd think he'd stop worrying as if I really did have Bipolar I.

The other is that I was hospitalized during that mania when I was not a danger to myself or others, nor was I gravely disabled. People do feel that they have a right to hospitalize someone in a manic episode, even though that is technically illegal, and for me was traumatizing. I had just been assaulted by my husband and went to an ER to get checked out after getting a hotel. My shrink encouraged me to go, but he wanted me there so that he could have me put on a hold. As a result I got no care for my two sprained knees and no counseling for assault. Had I not had a Bipolar I diagnosis they would not have been able to justify a hold.