PSYCH 406 (Psychopathology) - Suicide as Related to Major Depressive Disorder

Abstract

This essay describes the symptoms and diagnostic criteria for major depressive disorder, with an emphasis on the symptoms of thoughts of death and suicidal ideation. It further reviews methods of treatment, and then finishes with a review of ways therapists can forge and strengthen therapeutic relationships with suicidal patients.

 

Introduction

To exist or not, as a human being, is up to us. Albert Camus (1979) contends suicide is the only genuinely profound philosophical question to answer. True, every individual has the choice to exit life, however the cost of that exit can be significant for those left behind. Not even counting the invaluable cost of loss of life, suicide attempts alone accounted for nearly $27B in health care costs in 2019 in the United States (Hughes, et al., 2023). Even despite the massive expense from the fallout of suicide attempts, the emotional toll and impacts heaped on loved ones and friends who remain behind in the wake of a successful or unsuccessful suicide will take countless hours of therapy and grieving and perhaps even significant pharmacological expense to remediate. From a psychological, to an emotional, to an economic perspective, any way to advance the understanding of the patient’s motivation for suicide and greater insight into how to prevent suicides would be a worthy endeavor not only for the individual, but also for the common good. To that end, this essay will explain the most common disorder which leads to suicide.

This essay will describe major depressive disorder, including all the criteria that must be met in order to diagnose an individual with major depressive disorder (Maddux & Winstead, 2016 and American Psychiatric Association, 2022). Along with those criteria, it will also outline the symptoms and warning signs of those seeking to end their life (National Institute of Mental Health, 2022). It will then review three major avenues of treatment for major depressive disorder, which include electroconvulsive, psychopharmacological and psychotherapeutic forms (Maddux & Winstead, 2016). Lastly, the essay will delve into the topic of clinicians establishing the clinician-patient therapeutic alliance to assist patients in opening up about the challenges they face with suicidal ideation (Foster, et al., 2021).

Description, Symptoms, Diagnostic Criteria

While the impacts of major depressive disorder (MDD) can be persistent and influence human productivity, symptoms can worsen and lead to the untimely death of the sufferer. Maddux and Winstead (2016) note that MDD will perhaps be the number one cause of premature death and human disability globally in the next one hundred years. In the United States alone, the suicide rate has increased over a third between 1999 and 2018 and with the recent COVID-19 pandemic, that trend has continued to rise (Moutier, 2021). Therefore, spotting MDD symptoms effectively and early is key to suicide prevention.

The symptoms of MDD described in the DSM-5-TR (American Psychiatric Association, 2022) begin with understanding what a major depressive episode is. Symptoms include nine key markers: 1) a depressed mood, which may include feelings of helplessness and hopelessness, 2) the loss of interests or pleasure in activities the person normally enjoys, 3) losing 5% or more of their weight in 30 days while not intending to diet, 4) poor sleeping habits stemming from insomnia or perhaps sleeping all day, 5) constant agitation in movement or a significant lack of movement, 6) general lack of energy, 7) self-loathing, exceptional feelings of guilt or worthlessness, 8) significant challenges in concentration, deliberation, thinking or even decision-making, and most importantly, 9) repetitive thoughts of dying, death or suicide. As for this ninth symptom, the patient does not need to demonstrate it every day for a two-week period; once is sufficient to qualify. The patient must exhibit five or more of the nine listed symptoms (two of which must be a depressed mood and loss of interests) for a period of at least 14 days, and these must cause a substantial impact on their social life, job or other important aspects of their life, and the attribution of these symptoms must not stem from some other condition such as drug use, or another disorder such as schizophrenia (American Psychiatric Association, 2022, p. 183, 185). Lastly, in order for MDD to qualify as the diagnosis, the patient must demonstrate having one or more major depressive episodes, without any type of mania or hypomania.

One other important aspect of the diagnosis is related to whether there is an identifiable cause of the patient experiencing the symptoms. Some people may have recently dealt with an impactful and emotional event in their life such as the loss of a baby, a bankruptcy or loss of job, living through an act of God such as having a home and all possessions burned down in a wildfire or even having contracted a serious medical illness such as terminal cancer (American Psychiatric Association, 2022, p. 183). While many people may exhibit major depressive episode symptoms stemming from one of these drastic life events, it does not mean the person qualifies for the diagnosis of MDD.

As noted in the ninth symptom of MDD, if a patient has repetitive thoughts of death or suicide just once in a two-week period, along with the other symptoms, then they may have MDD. It is also important to note external markers which may predict if a patient is suicidal. Maddux and Winstead (2016, p. 193) observe that a majority of suicidal people convey their intent to kill themselves. More specifically, the National Institute of Mental Health (2022) provides a list of warning signs which loved ones and other people around the patient can spot. The patient may verbally express ideas of suicide, feelings of guilt or sense of being a burden on other people. They may express feelings such as helplessness, hopelessness, being trapped, having no purpose, or being sad, anxious, angry or expressing unendurable pain be it physical or emotional. Lastly, the patient may communicate in non-verbal ways such as searching online for ways to die, pushing close ones away or retreating from normal social interactions, acting with recklessness (e.g. risky skiing, driving, cliff jumping), consuming more drugs or alcohol, and sleeping and eating less. Related to the warning sign of recklessness, Maddux and Winstead (2016) note that suicides may be underreported because the act of suicide may appear to be accidental. For example, 15% of automobile accidents with a fatality may actually have been suicide related.

Treatment Options

There are three major avenues of treatment for MDD: electroconvulsive, psychopharmacological and psychotherapeutic therapy. The essay will briefly describe mechanisms which address the first two methods and then more deeply address the third method through a discussion on cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT).

Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) was discovered as a form of therapy in the 1930s (Maddux & Winstead, 2016, p. 205). The method for application is to deliver between 70 and 130 volts of electrical shock to the patient’s brain. The patient may endure nine or ten rounds of ECT over the course of several weeks. While ECT has proven to be somewhat effective, experts still do not know exactly why it works in some cases. One theory is that electrical shocks downregulate 5-HT (serotonin) receptors. Despite proving somewhat effective, patients’ memory functions degrade, and they have a more difficult time learning and recalling knowledge. Related to ECT is transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). TMS does not produce memory dysfunction and can be more precisely tuned. The only side effects reported are benign headaches and minor discomfort.

Pharmacological forms of therapy for major depressive disorder address dysfunction in serotonin regulation (Maddux & Winstead, 2016). Studies have shown that when individuals’ serotonin levels are depleted or if reuptake has been altered, then it begins to have a negative impact on mood, which may act as a catalyst for a depressive episode. Three medications have been used for quite some time to treat depression: monoamine oxidase inhibitors, tricyclic and tetracyclic antidepressants. More recent developments in antidepressant medications include selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs). All five medications work in some form or fashion to regulate serotonin levels. As for which one should be used with a patient, it is often a matter of finding the right medication and dosage with the least harmful side effects. One emerging medication to address depression is ketamine. Rather than targeting the regulation of serotonin, ketamine seems to aid in the regrowth of important synapses in the brain, improving brain neuroplasticity (Yale Medicine, 2021). Researchers are discovering that ketamine treatment coupled with CBT provides rapid and long-lasting positive change. Not only do ketamine and CBT together prove efficacious, but Maddux and Winstead (2016, p. 198) note that CBT coupled with other appropriate medication is more effective than either CBT or medication alone.

CBT and ACT are two well-known psychotherapeutic frameworks which help the patient to fundamentally change their underlying thinking to address negative perceptions of themselves and environment (Maddux & Winstead, 2016, p. 197-199). CBT encompasses multiple ways to help the patient alter the underlying thinking framework for how the patient processes events, as well as to couple their thinking to action. For example, people who suffer from MDD would be asked to recognize and write down their negative thoughts, along with the causes and effects which lead them to think this way. They would then be asked to assess and question those thoughts to ascertain if they truly match reality and rationality. Through this process, the patient begins to reconstruct their thinking narrative in a more positive and productive manner.

CBT is especially helpful in challenging and questioning hopelessness thinking in suicidal patients. In fact, studies have shown (Bryan, 2019) that versions of CBT for suicide prevention (CBT-SP) are so effective, that these specific forms of CBT have been recommended as standard care procedures for all suicidal patients. CBT-SP typically includes three successive phases. In the first phase, clinicians assess the risk of the patient and then collaboratively work with the patient to form a crisis and treatment plan. In the second phase, the therapist and patient work on revealing the dysfunctional thinking patterns and negative internal dialogues which lead to feelings and emotions related to helplessness, hopelessness, being trapped, and having no purpose. In the last phase, therapists and patients tie everything together by creating a plan to minimize relapse. Bryan (2019, p. 249) further observes the effectiveness of CBT-SP by stating that patients of CBT-SP were one-half to two-thirds less likely to attempt suicide when compared to treatment as usual.

ACT can be viewed as an extension and evolution of CBT (Maddux & Winstead, 2016, p. 198-199). While ACT is similar to CBT, it differs from its aim. ACT does not focus on minimizing the negative symptoms of depression, but to empower the patient with greater flexibility in their thinking. ACT helps the patient understand their core values and then proceed in a consistent manner with those values. ACT prompts the patient to pause and reflect on what they deeply value in life, and then to engage with their emotions and thoughts, rather than questioning them. By engaging with their thoughts and emotions through a comparison with their core values, the patient is able to discern gaps between who they are and who they wish to be, and then take specific and meaningful action. For example, ACT has proven to be quite successful with veterans dealing with suicide (Walser, et al., 2015, p. 30). It has shown that when a patient experiences suicidal ideation, the therapist would work with the patient to explore the patient’s core values, either through dialogue or a values assessment test. As the patient is confronted with ideas of death, they can accept those thoughts and pivot toward ways to pursue and fulfill meaning in their life by focusing on something they value.

Article Summarization: Strengthening the Therapist-patient Alliance

In the context of suicidal ideation, it has been observed that most suicidal individuals do not explicitly disclose through self-reporting. Foster, et al. (2021) note that only 24% reveal their suicidal plans through disclosure. The driving causes of hesitating to divulge their thoughts of ending their life are fears of judgement, hospitalization, and losing independence. Therefore, if therapists, clinicians and others who are in a position to help the patient can establish trust and openness in communication, they may be able to garner the patient’s confidence and assist them in getting the needed medication and therapeutic treatment. Foster, et al. (2021) argue that three specific aspects on which clinicians can focus to improve the therapist-patient alliance are: 1) awareness and management of countertransference of negative emotions, 2) deploying communication techniques which are empathic and 3) leveraging the patient’s subjective experience as feedback.

Countertransference occurs when the therapist experiences conscious or unconscious projections or judgements of the patient, which in some cases may interfere with the therapeutic process (American Psychological Association, 2018). Foster, et al. (2021, p. 258) note that therapists can exude negative emotions to an individual intent on ending their life. Quickly assessing countertransference is crucial to strengthening the therapist-patient alliance. The Therapist Response Questionnaire-Suicide Form is an innovative tool to rapidly assess countertransference and enables the therapist to secure supervisory coaching and support to manage countertransference.

Empathy is how one person relates to another, including focusing on commonalities as well as differences, which enables shared insight between individuals (Foster, et al., 2021, p. 259). Clinicians and therapists must have a life-long commitment to developing and mastering empathy in their practice, especially when working with suicidal patients. Besides continuing education and hands-on training seminars to learn and practice empathy, there are also tools which assist therapists to hone their empathy skills. The Empathic Communication Coding System (ECCS) assists in identifying opportunities for the therapist to practice a range of empathic responses. The ECCS aids in identifying the patient’s statements as emotion, progress or challenge and then suggests a range of potential ways a therapist could use empathy. For example, a widow may mention how she constantly thinks of her deceased husband, to which a therapist could respond with, “Are you thinking about death?” or with the more empathic response of, “It seems that these thoughts you are having are difficult. Has suicide crossed your mind?” Therapists who master the art of empathy will improve the chances of the patient opening up and being more receptive to treatment rather than suicide.

Lastly, when therapists form a solid alliance with the patient, they can leverage that trust to gain insight from the patient feedback. Gathering feedback from a patient who has attempted suicide or had thoughts of suicide can prove rich in understanding the paths leading to death as well as paths leading to recovery (Foster, et al., 2021, p. 259). Collecting this feedback and sharing it broadly enables the wider community to benefit from this untapped resource. Tools such as the Consultation and Relational Empathy assessment and Working Alliance Inventory collect data from the patient’s perspective. These feedback mechanisms reinforce patient autonomy as well as shed light on the subjective experience of the patient.

In sum, there are innovative ways and tools to facilitate greater collaboration between the therapist and suicidal patient. First, the therapist must be aware of and manage countertransference of negative emotions. Second, they must constantly improve their communication techniques by focusing on improving empathy. Lastly, they can tap into the patient’s subjective experience to use as feedback in the therapeutic process.

Conclusion

In conclusion, with the increasing trend of suicides globally, and the severe impacts they have on society, this essay endeavored to illuminate the reader on the topic of major depressive disorder, with an emphasis on the symptom of suicidal ideation and the diagnostic criteria indicating a risk for suicide. The essay then examined three methods of treatment in the forms of electroconvulsive therapy, pharmacological and psychotherapeutic avenues. It specifically addressed CBT, CBT-SP and ACT in the context of suicidal patients. Finally, the essay discussed the importance of the clinician-patient therapeutic alliance, along with a set of tools to enable the fortification of that collaborative effort. 

References

American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, text revision (5th ed.). American Psychiatric Association.

American Psychological Association. (2018). APA Dictionary of Psychology. Dictionary.apa.org. https://dictionary.apa.org/countertransference

Bryan, C. J. (2019). Cognitive behavioral therapy for suicide prevention (CBT‐SP): Implications for meeting standard of care expectations with suicidal patients. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 37(3), 247–258. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2411

Camus, A. (1979). The Myth of Sisyphus, and Other Essays. (J. O’Brien, Trans.). Penguin Books Ltd. (Original work published 1955)

Foster, A., Alderman, M., Safin, D., Aponte, X., McCoy, K., Caughey, M., & Galynker, I. (2021). Teaching Suicide Risk Assessment: Spotlight on the Therapeutic Relationship. Academic Psychiatry, 45(3), 257-261. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40596-021-01421-2

Hughes, P. M., Phillips, D. C., McGrath, R. E., & Thomas, K. C. (2023). Examining Psychologist Prescriptive Authority as a Cost-Effective Strategy for Reducing Suicide Rates. Professional Psychology, Research and Practice, 54(4), 284–294. https://doi.org/10.1037/pro0000519

Maddux, J. E., & Winstead, B. A. (2016). Psychopathology : Foundations For A Contemporary Understanding (4th ed.). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.

Moutier, C. Y. (2021). Innovative and Timely Approaches to Suicide Prevention in Medical Education. Academic Psychiatry, 45(3), 252–256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40596-021-01459-2

National Institute of Mental Health. (2022). Warning Signs of Suicide. Www.nimh.nih.gov. https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/warning-signs-of-suicide

Walser, R. D., Garvert, D. W., Karlin, B. E., Trockel, M., Ryu, D. M., & Taylor, C. B. (2015). Effectiveness of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy in treating depression and suicidal ideation in Veterans. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 74, 25–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2015.08.012

Yale Medicine. (2021, July 30). Ketamine & Depression: How it Works - Yale Medicine Explains. Www.youtube.com. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nW21-AYY_fs 

PSYCH 406 (Psychopathology) - Trauma and Pathologizing the Norm

Abstract

This essay discusses the observation of Western culture’s fascination with trauma, along with the history of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and how that diagnosis has expanded its scope. It also notes that most humans are resilient in adversity and trauma. For those who suffer long-lasting effects of trauma and exhibit PTSD symptoms, they should seek professional help and support.

Introduction

For many movie-goers, the summer is a great time to head to the silver screen and watch action, drama, and intriguing stories play out in spectacular visuals and chest-thumping sounds. This year, audiences are anticipating the third installment of the Deadpool series. For the uninitiated, Deadpool is an antihero known for his sharp sarcasm and dark humor. For example, in a scene from the first Deadpool movie (Miller, 2016), when he meets his girlfriend, Vanessa, the two enter a back-and-forth banter about the trauma and rough childhood they’ve endured. While this essay won’t recall the entire repartee, one of the less dark and non-sexual exchanges gives a good sense of the dialogue. At one point, Deadpool quips his bedroom was a hall closet, to which Vanessa volleys back she had to sleep in a dishwasher box, to which Deadpool replies, “you had a dishwasher?” (Miller, 2016). While dark and humorous, this represents the zeitgeist of modern culture’s romanticization of trauma .

In a recent Psychology Today article (2022, January 4), Robin Stern wrote regarding her observations of many examples of how society, particularly Western society, has become enamored with stories of trauma. From a conversation she had with her trainee about how she couldn’t get enough details of her clients’ trauma, to books by Bessel von der Kelk and Paul Conti  on bestsellers lists and to a documentary by Gabor Maté, all are examples of how the topic of trauma is having a significant cultural moment. However, Stern and others have wondered if there is a misunderstanding of what trauma is. Are people truly experiencing trauma, or are they simply experiencing stress, grief, or big life events ? Maddux and Winstead (2016, p. 162) in the chapter on trauma and stressor disorders note that there is “larger debate [regarding the] pathologizing of normal human suffering and the overdiagnosis of disorders .”

This essay will discuss the phenomenon of society’s romance with trauma and the issue of pathologizing normal behaviors (Harrist & Richardson, 2014). It will then pivot to a discussion on what constitutes real, clinical trauma and two psychosocial models of the etiology of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (Maddux & Winstead, 2016). Lastly, the essay will contend that many people suffer significant stress and emotional events, however, most are resilient and will recover (Bonanno, 2021). For those who truly suffer trauma, they too will largely recover, but for those who meet the criteria of PTSD, they should seek professional help.

Pathologizing Normal Behavior

Harrist and Richardson (2014) discuss many ways in which seemingly normal behavior has been pathologized in Western culture. They note how melancholy and despair may actually be perfectly normal responses to the instable world in which we live, yet modern science attempts to solve these responses with pharmaceuticals . They further wonder why hoarding is considered a mental disorder when people fill their house to the roof with junk but people who “amass billions of dollars while other people starve” are not pathologized (Harrist & Richardson, 2014, p. 202). But more importantly, they discuss the roots and genesis of the PTSD diagnosis.

They cite an article published in the British Medical Journal of how the old diagnoses of battle fatigue and war neurosis were replaced by PTSD. The early supporters of the PTSD diagnosis were also part of the anti-war movement during the Vietnam War. Under the new diagnosis of PTSD, war veterans could receive unique medical care. But more importantly, PTSD fundamentally changed the way soldiers were viewed and treated. Instead of the focus being on the unique history of the soldier and his psyche, PTSD “legitimized their victimhood” and the PTSD diagnosis was perhaps more of a statement against the nature of war than anything else (Harrist & Richardson, 2014, p. 203). This change was a pivotal moment as the diagnosis expanded in scope for the next several decades to explain not only battle trauma, but also “symptoms of distress following disturbing events, even ones relatively commonplace or just witnessed, not directly experienced, by individuals” (Harrist & Richardson, 2014, p. 203).

Returning to Stern (Psychology Today Contributors, 2022, January 4), she describes why PTSD and related disorders have seemingly expanded their scope. The experiences people share of  trauma are often remarkable and fascinating and “have a strong emotional charge” especially when compared to more normal experiences of people from overprotected and isolated lives. There is an aura about traumatic stories and people who live through those experiences are imbued with a type of fame and fascination. Others wish to share their own stressful experiences to gain traumatic credibility. But as Harrist and Richardson (2014) warn, while people may indeed experience big emotional events, the trauma of soldiers, war victims, and victims of sexual violence, to name a few, should not be “trivialized.” Definitions matter and delineation must be made clear between normal behavior in response to a significant event, and clinical trauma that people suffer from living through horrific events.

Clinical Trauma and Psychosocial Etiology Models of PTSD

While there have been changes to the PTSD entry between the DSM-4 and the DSM-5, such as moving it from an anxiety disorder to the newly created category of trauma- and stressor-related disorders, the key features of PTSD remain relatively the same (Maddux & Winstead, 2016, p. 165). The traumatic experiences must be related to death, the threat of death, significant bodily injury, or sexual violence. Victims may either experience these events directly or they may indirectly experience them such as when a close family member directly experiences it and then conveys the details of the horrific event to the victim. Stemming from one or more of these experiences, the victim should demonstrate intrusive memories, dreams, or psychological and even physiological effects from reminders of the traumatic event. They will avoid any reminders of the event and may begin to have cognitive distortions, memory loss, emotional distress, and  even detachment. From there, they will develop and exhibit strong response arousal, careless behavior, hypervigilance, or experience problems with concentration or sleep. The victim must suffer many of the above symptoms for more than one month after the event. Underlying all these symptoms is the victim’s inability to process or integrate the traumatic experiences into their life. In turn, they are left with less than adequate coping mechanisms.

Based on a sample of people in the United States, it is estimated that over 60% of men and 51% of women experience trauma (Maddux & Winstead, 2016, p. 163). The majority of those adapt and do not experience long-term maladaptive coping mechanisms. As for why some people might cope well and adapt to a traumatic experience while others do not, there are many etiological theories that explain why some suffer PTSD. This essay will only touch on two: cognitive and emotional processing .

The cognitive etiological model theorizes that the individual’s beliefs and knowledge about himself, the world, and other people are maladaptive and weak, and when the individual experiences a traumatic event, their beliefs and conception of safety, are crushed (Maddux & Winstead, 2016, p. 169). They are unable to process the events and make meaning out of the experience. In fact, Harrist and Richardson (2014, p. 207) note that in a highly individualistic culture, many people don’t experience “shared meanings and coping strategies” and are thus left to their own devices to cope with trauma. In turn, they become overwhelmed and experience PTSD.

The emotional processing etiological model is based on the theory that the individual creates fear structures to deal with dangers in their environment. However, when these fear structures build excessive responses, the individual becomes inflexible in learning how to modify their responses (Maddux & Winstead, 2016, pp. 170-171). For example, a person with PTSD will demonstrate avoidance behavior, which in turn prevents them from tapping into and updating  their fear structure in a way that would enable them to successfully adapt to an event. 

As briefly noted, most people who suffer a traumatic event are able to make meaning out of the experience, adapt, and recover from the stress of trauma. In all this discussion on trauma and PTSD, it has been broadly observed that humans are quite adaptable, even when confronted with the worst of trauma.

The Resilient Human

Maddux and Winstead (2016, p. 163) produce a chart that visually demonstrates that even with the traumatic events of sexual and non-sexual assaults, people are able to recover and adapt well after the event. For sexual assault victims, 70% report PTSD symptoms one month after the event. That percentage continues to drop over time, going as low as 30% one year after the event. For non-sexual assault victims, 40% report PTSD symptoms one month after the event with a declining trend over time, going to 10% at the one-year mark. Overall, the data suggest there is a “natural recovery curve” (2016, p. 162), in which most victims can make a strong recovery. Only a small minority of victims experience PTSD .

All of this data supports the claim that perhaps by pathologizing and stigmatizing many big, emotional, stressful events, as a whole, society may be undercutting the process of recovery . To lend greater support and care for a victim, pathologies are created, and focus is placed on the symptoms, rather than successful and creative coping mechanisms. There is also a significant individualization and rights-based view of modern pathologies. Harrist and Richardson (2014, p. 204) note this paradigm “underestimates and tends to undermine the creative capacity of people to cope with, and even at times find meaning in, suffering and traumatic experiences.”

Harrist and Richarson (2014, p. 204) continue their discussion with examples of two non-Western cultures that do not pathologize not only big, emotional, stressful events, but not even trauma. Researchers and counselors went to Sri Lanka after the 2004 tsunami and worn-torn Afghanistan and realized people exhibited symptoms not on the PTSD list and when they tried to provide individualized grief counseling, the isolation “actually [exacerbated] fears of loss or disturbance of one’s role in the community.”

Returning to Stern (Psychology Today Contributors, 2022, January 4), she contends our judgment becomes impaired when we become captivated by stories of trauma . By immersing ourselves in our own emotions, we may overlook the needs of the person telling his or her traumatic story. Most importantly, we underestimate our resilience and fail to recognize our true strength. She goes on to discuss some broad observations from one researcher who has studied this topic for many years. She quotes George Bonanno who says, “Most people are resilient …some people are traumatized; some people recover. There are different trajectories.” In fact, in one of Bonanno’s more recent articles entitled The Resilience Paradox (2021, p. 2), he and other researchers reviewed 67 studies to better understand “outcome trajectories” of people who endure a potentially traumatic event (PTE). He writes, “two thirds of the participants showed the resilience trajectory. Thus, not only is resilience to PTEs common, it is consistently the majority outcome.”

In sum, many studies and researchers have noted that the human is resilient in the face of big, emotional, stressful events and even traumatic events. While trying to determine the root cause of why some suffer PTSD and others do not, researchers are finding that PTSD is fairly rare. For those who do suffer many of the symptoms of PTSD for months after the traumatic event, they should continue to seek support from clinicians, counselors, and a support structure.

Conclusion

In conclusion, this essay examined the phenomenon of society’s romance with trauma and the issue of pathologizing normal behaviors. Western culture seems to be experiencing a cultural moment with its fascination of hearing others’ traumatic experiences. While many people do experience big, emotional, stressful events, they are most likely not suffering clinical PTSD. PTSD is reserved for people who experience events related to death, the threat of death, significant bodily injury, or sexual violence. Furthermore, they develop long-lasting, maladaptive coping mechanisms. There are many theories of the etiology of PTSD, of which two are emotional processing and cognitive. Ultimately, many people suffer significant stress and emotional events, however, most are resilient and will recover. Even for those who truly suffer trauma related to death, bodily and sexual violence, they too will largely recover, but those who meet the criteria of PTSD and who have lasting effects, they should seek professional help and support from their family, friends, and social networks . 

References

Bonanno, G. A. (2021). The resilience paradox. European Journal of Psychotraumatology, 12(1), 1942642–1942642. https://doi.org/10.1080/20008198.2021.1942642 

Harrist, R. S., & Richardson, F. C. (2014). Pathologizing the Normal, Individualism, and Virtue Ethics. Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy, 44(3), 201-211. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10879-013-9255-7

Maddux, J. E., & Winstead, B. A. (2016). Psychopathology : Foundations For A Contemporary Understanding (4th ed.). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.

Miller, T. (Director). (2016, February 8). Deadpool. 20th Century Fox.

Psychology Today Contributors. (2022, January 4). 5 Big New Trends | Psychology Today. Www.psychologytoday.com. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/articles/202201/5-big-new-trends  

PSYCH 406 (Psychopathology) - TikTok and Diagnosis

 Abstract

This essay discusses the trend of self-diagnosis for mental disorders by people consuming social media, such as TikTok videos. It then examines the complexity of proper diagnosis while discussing the challenges the DSM-5 faces in providing clear guidance on diagnosis. Lastly, it addresses the risks of self-diagnosis and steps people can take to not succumb to those risks.

Introduction

In the summer of 2022, my family was about to enjoy a much-needed vacation. But before we began the 1500-mile drive, we were slightly concerned about a noise from the family van. The van was dropped off at the local mechanic who regularly changes the oil in all our vehicles. Later in the afternoon, the mechanic called back and said the van would need a $7000 repair and even suggested buying a new car might be cheaper. Shocked by this diagnosis, we took the van to another mechanic we knew from buying a used car. After a day, this other mechanic said he had seen this problem in vans many times before and it would cost less than $500 to repair. Of course, we went with the second mechanic and the van is still working great to this day.

The risks and dangers of misdiagnoses can be significant, even for a mechanical car that is relatively less complicated than the human brain. In the case of our van, the misdiagnosis would have cost us significantly and the problem would still not have been fixed. However, for humans, the risks and dangers of misdiagnosing a mental condition can be even more substantial. 

With the widespread availability of information online and the broad reach of social media, the practice of self-diagnosis and sharing one’s story online has presented new challenges to the mental health community. The framework for diagnoses, including the use of the DSM-5, is intended to facilitate common understanding and nomenclature for psychologists and psychiatrists, as well as aid in predictions and information sharing and even guide therapeutic practices (Maddux & Winstead, 2016; David & Deeley, 2024). But despite significant research and debate, the DSM-5 is not perfect, which fact underscores the complexity of diagnosis. Even so, many unqualified and untrained people self-diagnose because of ease of access to the DSM-5 and because they hear others discussing their symptoms of disorders on social media. This practice has led to problems such as definition dilution and perceived absolution of responsibility for one’s actions (Cassata, 2024; David & Deeley, 2024). While self-diagnosis may have its place, individuals who choose this route should always seek professional assistance and remain open to the possibility that their self-diagnosis could be incorrect.

Self-diagnosis of Mental Disorders Via TikTok

Juliana Dodds (The Project, 2022) did not feel understood. In a search for answers, she turned to watching content on social media, including TikTok. When she heard others’ stories, she felt they could fully explain her perspective. Many people, like Juliana, are looking for answers as to why they act the way they do. For some people, the discovery of social media influencers explaining their symptoms becomes a launching point of self-discovery, which leads to a conversation with their psychologist and may confirm the diagnosis. However, not all cases are as straightforward as watching a video, talking to a therapist, and receiving confirmation of a diagnosis. Others may feel validated after watching social media, but when discussing the issue with a psychologist, and after being tested multiple times, the self-diagnosis is incorrect. Some patients become convinced they have a specific mental disorder despite what the psychologist says. Juliana falls in the latter category, and although her doctor diagnosed her with complex post-traumatic stress disorder, she is convinced she has attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

The trend of self-diagnosis stemming from social media has become so pervasive, that a recent study was conducted to understand how accurate or inaccurate these influencers are. Cassata (2024) reviewed the study conducted by Drexel University’s A.J. Drexel Autism Institute and found that less than a third of the most popular autism-related content included correct information and that over 40% of those videos “were completely inaccurate.” The study further noted the extent of the misinformation, stating that many egregiously inaccurate videos had been viewed close to 150 million times. While the power and reach of social media grants millions of people access to potentially valuable information, which may kick-start them on the path to recovery, it nevertheless remains vitally important that proper diagnosis is applied. Often the diagnosis process takes time and can be very complex.

DSM-5 and Complexity of Diagnosis

The DSM-5-TR (American Psychological Association, 2022) contains over 1,000 pages of text, criteria, definitions, tables, and statistics. Countless hours of research and debate underlies the wide-ranging scope of mental diagnoses enumerated in the manual. In the section entitled “Use of the Manual” the authors both describe the extensive assessment that should be performed, as well as warn readers of the dangers of “simply [checking] off the symptoms” (p. 21, 2022). Indeed, case formulation should include a detailed clinical history and a succinct summary of the social, psychological, and biological factors that may have contributed to the development of a particular mental disorder. Even after all factors have been considered, ultimately, clinical judgment is critical in determining the relative severity and significance of an individual's signs, symptoms, and diagnosis.

Despite the numerous hours of research and effort poured into the DSM-5, a review of its history proves that this resource is not perfect. While great strides have been made to make it the valuable resource it is today, forthcoming editions and revisions will face difficulty in basing future additions on empirical support as well as managing the shift from a categorial model to a dimensional model (see Maddux & Winstead, p. 100, 2016).

With many research questions left unanswered, some take the approach of advocating for the addition of a disorder to garner attention so that empirical data could be collected on the disorder, as was the case with “severe irritability in youth” (p. 101, 2016). While perhaps a worthy cause, this practice has the risk of defining a disorder that does not truly exist. As to the shift in classification, more are beginning to recognize the consistent failures of the categorical model, and therefore the DSM-5 has begun the shift toward a dimensional model. Shifting to a dimensional model will allow for a continuum of mental disorders based on severity, frequency, or intensity, and will allow clinicians to provide a richer diagnosis as well as improved pathways to treatment.

In sum, the numerous considerations that should go into a diagnosis are guided by years of clinical training, as well as countless hours of research and debate to produce the DSM-5. Even with the critiques the DSM-5 faces, this situation further underscores the importance of a proper diagnosis by trained and qualified clinicians, and self-diagnosis from watching a TikTok video is fraught with peril.

Risks and Proper Use of Self-diagnosis

Virtually anyone can access the DSM-5. While obtaining this resource is easy, its use in diagnosing a disorder requires hours of training and practice. Many people will read the DSM-5 and begin to draw conclusions that they exhibit the hallmarks of a particular disorder. They may even take the added step of sharing their story on social media. Others follow proper channels and seek an expert to determine if the disorder warrants an official diagnosis. Two major risks of self-diagnosing are definition dilution (Cassata, 2024) and perceived absolution of responsibility for one’s actions (David & Deeley, 2024). While self-diagnosis, whether through reading the DSM-5 or watching a video on social media, may be the catalyst for the individual to get the help they need, they must not stop there. They ought to consult an expert and seek professional help.

One major risk of self-diagnosis is definition dilution. This means as more untrained people improperly explain a diagnosis on social media, the viewers of those misinformed videos also jump to inaccurate conclusions. The viewers, in turn, spread the misinformation, as well as become convinced they have a particular disorder. When a viewer visits a trained clinician and hears they may have a different disorder, the patient may become upset and even believe they are being gaslit (Cassata, 2024).

Another major risk of self-diagnosis is the perception that the patient is absolved of the responsibility for seeking a cure because fundamentally the self-diagnosing patient believes the symptoms they exhibit are normal and do not constitute a disorder. David and Deeley (2024) observed that self-diagnosis stems from “grass roots movements” such as the neurodiversity movement, which seek to “[reframe] several diagnostic categories as (mere) variations of normality” and even propose that these are not disorders (p. 1057, 2024). Once this concept (that a disorder is normal) is accepted (either individually or socially), the individual could assume an attitude that “the world needs to accommodate him and ‘his autism’” and he need not search for a cure or alter his behavior in any way (p. 1058, 2024).

There is room for allowing the potential for self-diagnosis, with several caveats. If a person has sought professional help and if in the course of exploring all possibilities, the patient discovers information on social media, and most importantly, if they discuss what they’ve learned with their trained mental health provider, then perhaps social media has a place in the diagnosis process. The Internet has connected billions of people. For some who may have limited resources and time, perhaps social media content might fast-track the diagnosis process. But the importance of not succumbing to naïveté cannot be emphasized enough. The patient should always keep an open mind when consuming social media and should generally be willing to trust trained experts. Cassata (2024) interviewed a trained clinician who wisely stated, “Social media, in and of itself, is not the enemy … the real threat seems to be our unquestioning, naïve relationship to social media and our belief that diagnoses can be self-made without consulting a professional.”

Conclusion

In conclusion, with the widespread availability of online information and the broad reach of social media, self-diagnosis and sharing personal stories online have posed new challenges to clinicians, psychologists, and therapists. The diagnostic framework, including the DSM-5, is designed to create a common understanding and lexicon for psychologists and psychiatrists. It also aids in making predictions, facilitating information sharing, and guiding therapeutic practices. However, despite extensive research and debate, the DSM-5 is not perfect, which further highlights the complexity of diagnosis. Nonetheless, many unqualified and untrained individuals self-diagnose due to the ease of access to information and exposure to stories influencers share on social media. This practice has led to issues such as the dilution of diagnostic definitions and the perceived absolution of responsibility for one's actions. While there may be a space for self-diagnosis, those who go down this path should always consult professional help and always keep an open mind that the self-diagnosis may be wrong. 

References

American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, text revision (5th ed.). American Psychiatric Association.

Cassata, C. (2024, April 11). Autism: TikTok Leading People to Inaccurate Self-Diagnosis (J. Peeples & J. Seladi-Schulman, Eds.). Healthline. https://www.healthline.com/health-news/autism-self-diagnosis-tiktok

David, A. S., & Deeley, Q. (2024). Dangers of self-diagnosis in neuropsychiatry. Psychological Medicine, 54(6), 1057-1060. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291724000308 

Maddux, J. E., & Winstead, B. A. (2016). Psychopathology : Foundations For A Contemporary Understanding (4th ed.). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.

The Project. (2022, December 6). Dr TikTok: People Using TikTok To Self-Diagnose Neurodivergent Conditions Such As ADHD Or Autism. Www.youtube.com. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhx7PnHZ7cY&ab_channel=TheProject