This forum post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Julian. Show Details
This forum post is hidden because you have submitted an abuse report against it. Show Details
Medicalisation is a term given to the process by which aspects of life hitherto considered ordinary or natural come to be seen as medical disorders. It can be benign. Ailments that a darker age viewed as a sign of personal failings – insanity say – have lost their moral sting and are on their way to being as value-free as a dose of eczema. But there can be disadvantages. Medicalising a problem can also mean that responsibility for solving it is passed to doctors or, more worryingly for some, the pharmaceutical industry. While few would query the medicalising of schizophrenia, shyness might be a different matter. The recent on-line publishing of a draft of DSM-V, the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders has introduced a number of potential new disorders, including binge eating and ‘temper dysregulation’. What a less scientific age might have called the sins of gluttony and wrath are on their way to being diagnosable disorders and, presumably, disorders that will invite pharmacological regulation. While the loss of moral opprobrium clinging to these conditions will please some, others will argue that an unintended consequence will be a loss of personal responsibility for behaviour. In your view, is the widening of the net of psychiatry a good thing?