Reply to comment

I don’t find the idea of mental illness fads surprising.  Like Claire mentioned, it is easy to see how the occurrence of mental illnesses may be in part due to self-fulfilling prophecies.  One can be a hypochondriac and it probably won’t induce a physical disease.  One could argue for the influence of stress in physical maladies; however, in general it seems unlikely that one could will themselves into getting a sinus infection or rheumatoid arthritis.  On the other hand – as we have previously mentioned – when we talk or think we are physically influencing our brains.  With this in mind, it seems not only possible, but likely, that people may talk themselves into depression.  Thus, it is easy to see how one may be able to convince themselves that they have depression when surrounded by a culture consumed by the topic, leading to the manifestation of more serious symptoms.

            Mental illness trends probably also occur due to fads in diagnosis.  Part of this may be warranted: if the symptoms of a mental illness are on everyone’s radar, then both parents and doctors may be more likely to recognize the problem.  However, there is also the possibility of over-diagnosis.  I read an article discussing the problem of over-diagnosing children with bipolar disorder.  The article points to the prevalence of popular books about “the bipolar child” which may convince parents of normal children that their child is afflicted.  Because mental illness diagnosis depends on patient (and parent) description, it is easy to see how this may lead to over-diagnosis.  Additionally, doctors are not immune to the influence of trends in science.  If they have recently read an article on a new theory of depressive symptoms, for example, they may be more likely to diagnose depression simply from a recency effect.

            Also, I found the notion that a disability only exists in the context of an ability very interesting.  However, I agree with Bobby that there seems to be little practical application of this realization.  We function as a society because of our shared abilities (similar to our dependence on shared subjectivity).  To take an obvious example, there would be no cohesive structure or unified mechanism of communication without a shared language system.  And there is no practical reason to abolish a system simply because some people do not have the ability to assimilate.