Disorders for a New Century

Have you noticed how we've been overrun, suddenly, with trained psychologists and psychiatrists? How just about everyone can diagnose a behavioral or emotional disorder without the benefit of education, training, testing or, for that matter, any interaction with the individual? And do so on the spot with little -- or any -- real evidence? With complete confidence?

What skill! What insight! What brilliant powers of observation!

What a crock.

Hear of a child who keeps his room very neat? Must be OCD. (Obsessive Compulsive Disorder for the few non-psychologists/psychiatrists among us.) Because, after all, what other kind of kid is tidy?

Or someone who is highly organized and prides him or herself on being punctual? OCD, again. Being organized -- once a prized attribute -- is now, according to many, the symptom of a serious emotional problem.

Or what about a student who daydreams and bores easily in class? A clear case of Attention Deficit Disorder, the dreaded ADD. I mean, really. What type of student could possibly allow his or her mind to wander while in class? Or get bored in school? Couldn't possibly be because school might be dull, could it? No way. Must be ADD.

Or a 'bright' child who doesn't do her homework and would rather play video games. Without doubt, the famed ADD. Indeed, it could only be a serious disorder that would drive a 'bright' child to avoid homework in favor of video games. Couldn't possibly be that the child may not be quite so 'bright' or that playing video games is more fun than doing homework? No, it's simply not possible. Not today. Must be a disorder. Must be ADD.

Or an overweight person who eats when not hungry? Of course, an eating disorder. Because only someone with an eating disorder eats when he or she is not hungry. At least now we understand why obesity runs rampant in our country: Eating disorders abound. Can't be because many of us aren't able control the hand-to-mouth-with-soda-or-cookies-in-it action, could it? No. It's much easier to blame a disorder than ourselves. It's not me, it's this damned disorder!

Actually, this quick-to-diagnose reflex may be a disorder unto itself. Ah, a topic for another day.

In response to the uneducated, untrained, unlicensed among us who are eager to diagnose serious emotional and behavioral disorders -- and OCD, ADD and eater disorders are certainly in that category, especially when they inhibit normal, healthy behavior -- I say this: Cease and desist! For two substantial reasons:

1. It's irresponsible.

2. You are likely wrong.

You don't go around diagnosing cancer whenever you see a mole, do you? Or any other medical malady whenever you hear of a pain. So why do you so readily and wantonly ascribe a disorder to what might be a normal set of behaviors or, in the very least, a set of behaviors that can be attributed to something other than a disorder?

Might that kid who's highly organized be just that: Highly organized. (By the way, remember when that a good thing?)

Or what about the student who bores easily in class? Maybe the teach is dull, or the subject matter is uninteresting, or the student has other things on his or her mind?

Or the person who eats to excess? Maybe, just maybe, that person isn't afflicted with a disorder at all. Maybe that person just likes to eat. A lot.

If this sounds a bit emotional, forgive me. It's just that labeling people, without the benefit of a rigorous process, is potentially harmful in itself.

But I understand the need many of us have to attribute behavior to a psychological disorder. (It's one of the reasons I chose this profession.) To that end, I offer two new disorders. Both have yet to be fully documented, so we, together, are on the leading edge of understanding, recognizing and diagnosing each of them. Join me in welcoming two new disorders for the 21st century, currently running rampant throughout our society.

Smartphone Dependence Disorder (SDD). This significant and debilitating behavioral and emotional disorder manifests itself in a continuous and ceaseless connection to and interaction with a PDA. Symptoms of SDD include:

• Frequent holding, fondling, caressing and/or cleaning of the device
• On-going, surreptitious reference to the device, often in one's lap, just below table or desk level
• A belief that the interaction with the PDA is, indeed, secret and not observable by anyone (Hey, if no eye contact is made, how can anyone see what I'm doing?)
• The continuous, invasive thought that some new, exciting, and/or time-critical e-mail may have just been received that requires instant response; and,
• That life as we know it is simply not worth living without constant access to e-mail, texting, Facebook or the Internet.

Therapies to deal with SDD are typically unsuccessful. To date, the only actions seen to be effective in preventing the behaviors associated with the disorder, at least temporarily, include:

1. Physical separation of the device from the owner. A minimum of 5 miles is required.

2. Destruction of the device. Throwing the phone into a large body of water, preferably from a substantial height, has proven to be the most successful approach, although tossing the device onto rocks is also effective. In both cases, it is essential that the person suffering from SDD witness the device's complete destruction. (Note: Mere breakage is not sufficient.)

While the brand of PDA is irrelevant, SDD is more often seen in owners of iPhones. For obvious reasons. That said, they don't call it a Crackberry for nothing.

Bloodless Heart Syndrome. This serious malady appears to be abundant early in the 21st century and, as a result, can be observed widely. It manifests itself with the following fervent beliefs:

• That the poor and others without substantial means/resources should be left to their own devices
• That the poor are poor because they choose to be
• That leaving poverty is within everyone's grasp, requiring only an effort to find a well-paying job
• That taking care of oneself is just that: The need to take care of oneself -- and not rely on government to do so
• That taxing everyone fairly is an outdated, inappropriate concept that's so last century
• That if 2/3 of the world's billionaires are self-made, anyone can do it; and,
• That the best healthcare insurance is to stay healthy.

BHS -- not to be confused with Berkeley High School (Go Jackets!) -- strikes Republicans and Tea Party members with high frequency. Actually, BHS may be a requirement for party membership.

To date, only one treatment has proven effective: Becoming poor. Losing one's home accelerates recovery, especially if that home was bought with a subprime loan.

So, as we head into Thanksgiving, I ask two things:

1. Enough already with the knee-jerk diagnoses of what are serious behavioral and emotional disorders. Leave that to trained professionals.

2. Instead, focus on two readily observable disorders for the 21st century. They have yet to find their way into the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders IV, so both are fair game. Go at it! Find the sufferers of SDD and BHS among us.

Have a very happy Thanksgiving. Leave your PDAs at home and eat too much. And don't let anyone accuse you of having a bloodless heart.