Posted by fachad on September 2, 2002, at 5:44:38
In reply to And to follow up on something Fachad wrote . . . ., posted by trialerror on August 31, 2002, at 20:03:59
Well, those creteria are pretty arbitrary, IMHO. The checklists for the disorders are a lot like horoscopes - you can say, umm, YES, that is true for me!
And it really is true for you, in a sense. Don't forget that the primary purpose of DSM is to try to make psychiatry seem like "regular" medicine, and more importantly, to give insurance companies something concrete to reimburse for. Don't take a DSM diagnosis - or the lack of one - too seriously.
Besides, the only ADD creteria that could be called into doubt is the prior diagnosis, and that would be hard to prove either way - it could have been undiagnosed, your parents might not have believed in it so they refused to let you be diagnosed, you could have moved and lost records, etc.
> On Mar 19, 2002, Fachad wrote:
>
> >>> The only current approved uses are treatment of ADHD and narcolepsy, but many pdocs are finding them useful for augmenting SSRIs and other ADs. <<<
>
> (See - http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20020318/msgs/98949.html )
>
> This leaves those of us with attention deficit SYMPTOMS, but who are NOT blessed with a "certifiable," etiologically correct, DSM-IV sanctioned ADH "DISORDER," in quite a bind, as regards obtaining psychostimulant medication.
>
> Now if I could find a doctor who medicates according to actual current symptoms rather than what my mental health was 40 years ago, I might not be in such a pickle.
>
> As it is, a monthly trip to Tijuana is looking more and more likely.
>
> I can't be the only one who's been faced with this dilemma, can I?
>
> -trial&error
poster:fachad
thread:118329
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20020829/msgs/118507.html