• 3 Posts
  • 572 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: August 2nd, 2023

help-circle


  • Sorry, you said insurance and I missed it somehow. I agree that laymen and insurance companies treat it as a bible, but I also think that’s how the APA presents it. If the goal is to compile “symptoms that tend to present together” the DSM does a poor job of making that clear.

    I have several problems with the DSM. This isn’t an exhaustive list but off the top of my head:

    -It’s based on the idea that there’s a clear line between “normal” and “disordered” mental functioning, and that we can quantify all of a person’s experiences to land on either side of that line. There are a handful of diagnoses that are discrete enough for me to say “you either have it or you don’t” but the majority of them are so arbitrary that they’re not useful. Mood disorders are especially vague.

    -Inter-rater reliability is notoriously poor. I can diagnose anyone with a disorder to argue medical necessity for therapy.

    -It includes conditions that cannot and should not be diagnosed by mental health professionals, like narcolepsy. It’s good for providers to know what narcolepsy is, but unless they’re going to include every other medical condition, I don’t know why they include the ones they do.

    -DSM-5 broadened the criteria for several disorders, possibly to increase access to insurance coverage, but it’s edging ever closer to categorizing every human experience as a disorder. According to DSM-5, if you’re having depressive symptoms for more than 2 weeks after a loved one dies, it’s no longer grief and it’s considered a major depressive episode. When people criticized that bereavement clause, DSM-5-TR included “prolonged grief disorder” which extends the time you can grieve the loss without a MDD diagnosis. But grief is absolutely a normal response to loss, and sometimes it can be really disruptive and long-lasting. Why are we pretending that’s disordered?

    -The majority of every DSM task force has been older white men, and we should be very skeptical of what they consider normal or not.








  • Sure, exposition has always been a thing, especially in low-effort media. But I would say movies and TV are at a historic low-point in visual storytelling. For a growing portion of it, the picture might be pretty to look at, but it’s not where we get any important information about the plot. I’m not saying it’s good or bad, but it’s definitely become a feedback loop.

    My wife works from home. She’ll frequently put an amazing movie on in the background while she works, then say the movie was “just okay” and never watch it again because she’s “already seen it.” Why would any producer waste their effort on the visual part if half the audience isn’t watching?









  • The other day I there was a request for rapid response by my work. When I got there, several school buses were idling in the street, with parents lined up to meet them, for like 25 minutes. School policy is that kids stay on the bus until ICE has left the area.

    There was an SUV with 3 masked up agents just sitting there, heckling observers. They said, “If you guys would leave us alone, we could do our job.” I said, “Oh yeah? What’s your job?” and they said, “Catching the criminal illegal aliens and pedophile predators. Don’t you want us to protect the kids?” These smug fucks spend their weekday afternoons looming around bus stops, and if they miss a chance to snatch someone, they’ll settle for scaring little kids. The worst of the worst. There were about 50 parents, teachers and neighbors at the intersection by the time they gave up and left.

    They’re not winning the war, but they’re laying siege against our time, money and mental bandwidth. It’s exhausting.


  • Aside from revenge against Walz… one theory is that we’re a functioning community that’s ethnically diverse, relatively progressive, union strong, and very friendly to queer folks. Fox News would have you believe that any one of those features creates a godless hellscape, but we’re doing pretty good. Minnesota grew a huge budget surplus under Walz, and then we invested it in schools and social programs. The Republican tradition is to destroy something (see: the federal government) and say, “See? Told you it was broken!”