PhD/PsyD Just a thread to post the weirdest/whackiest/dumbest mental health-related stuff you come across in the (social) media...
Started by EnPsychlopedia
Get help with your application
Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.
Someone is arguing with me that the body perceiving pain is the same as a Criterion A trauma, because the body doesn't know the difference (meaning, if the source of the pain is actually dangerous).
Yet another example of people thinking trauma equals “real, bad, legitimate suffering” and “anything other than trauma” equals “not that bad, not valid, just get over it.”
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
The Sophistic, lawyerly, olympian contortions of argumentative tortured logic that people come up with these days to attempt to justify a PTSD diagnosis never ceases to amaze me.
The body does 'keep the score,' dontcha know?
I'd love to hear the examples/contexts.
- smashing your thumb with a hammer? Not criterion A, but painful as sh%*.
- Sawing off your own hand with a buzzsaw and nearly bleeding to death (I'll allow it, along with cardiac arrest)
- Chronic migraine headaches, joint pain, gout (which can be severe) and charlie horses? Nope.
DSM-5 specifically allows 'life-threatening emergencies (e.g., waking during surgery, debridement of severe burn wounds, emergency cardioversion [defibrillation]) and events that evoke catastrophic feelings of terror, pain, helplessness or imminent death.'
They also list 'life-threatening medical emergencies (acute MI, anaphylactic shock).'
Though I would imagine that experiencing kidney stones (which could be EXTREMELY painful) or wisdom tooth extraction (recovery) would not qualify nor would uncomplicated natural childbirth (though, over the weekend I did see an abstract of a study examining vaginal delivery childbirth as a cause of PTSD sxs).
Last edited:
I had a patient that got hit in the face w a disposable half-empty 12oz bottle of water thrown by a child. Not only did they claim a brain injury, but also PTSD.
Spoiler...they had neither.
Spoiler...they had neither.
But what if they thought that the bottle was filled with hydrochloric acid?
How about opening a cabinet door, themselves, "striking" their head, leading to catastrophic brain injury?
Sanman
O.G.
I know someone with a similar story. In this case they are likely alleging TBI. I had a guy in his 80s that bumped his head in the attic while fixing something and ended up with a nasty subdural hemorrhage.
Evidently, some folks have never heard of this important organ known as the "brain," which is not only essential in human nociception but also happens to be the organ responsible for such fundamental cognitive processes as "thinking" and "interpreting physical sensations in light of the general milieu so as to make adaptive decisions about present danger."
And speaking of the brain, it's frightening what some therapist folks allow to pass as "neuroscience."
As well as some of our friends in psychiatry
Examples you’ve seen?
That a patient reporting positive reactions to stimulant medication is confirmation that the patient has ADHD.
That benzos are a great treatment for PTSD.
Dude, I got downvoted to HECK in the psychiatry sub for saying that you should taper a benzo prior to doing behavioral treatment for panic.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
That's weird, as most psychiatrists I know are extremely wary of benzos in general and thus excited to taper at any time.
I'd be surprised if 10% of the users on r/psychiatry were practicing psychiatrists.
Fair point!
Sanman
O.G.
They were resistant to accepting the idea that they cannot medicate a medical condition? I am shocked. This equivalent to telling r/therapists sub that supportive therapy is not effective.
If there's anything that prescribers hate more than practicing evidence based medicine, it's a non-prescriber questioning their non EBP decision making processes. 😉
Or their assessment processes... Had to tell many a parent that their kid actually did not have autism after a pediatrician diagnosed it in a routine well child visit
That subreddit sometimes seems like an extension of the cult of psychoanalysis.
Ha! I got referred to a specialist for my 9 month old by a very worried resident (and attending!) because he wasn't doing canonical babbling yet.
I called the specialist because I am anxious human. The very nice person on the other line told me in nicer words that the pediatrician was a ding dong and baby Shiori wasn't even old enough for them to do an intake yet.
The canonical babbling showed up a couple of weeks later. I switched to a new pediatrician. Fingers crossed for the next well child visit. I can't imagine what I would have done if they had diagnosed ASD. Fortunately, that would have been a big enough issue that I would have caught on that they were all ding dongs sooner.
There's a thread in the therapist sub about radical acceptance and, holy cow, I am pretty sure that at least half of the sub doesn't actually understand what it is
Yeah, I don't have a basis of comparison other than my in-laws, but our pediatrician (who's been practicing for decades) also seems to have a pretty low bar for putting in referrals. He'll usually tell us if he's doing it more so out of an abundance of caution rather than because he's genuinely worried. I'd rather that than the alternative, at least.
I'm not sure if it's just a coincidence, or if it reflects a broader change in pediatric practice to refer more quickly/freely rather than taking a "wait and see" approach.
I am okay with being cautious, for sure. Please, give me all the referrals. When I called for information, I was told it would be another 3-4 months before we could even start a real intake to assess him because he was so young. The pediatrician didn't say any of that. They just said he was delayed in verbal skills and handed us a brochure.
Even with my pretty solid understanding of developmental psych, I was worried I had missed something. I had to be reassured by all my parent friends (who are also psychologists) and daycare that he was fine and on track. I can't imagine the agency receiving the influx appreciates the additional headache of worried parents reaching out thinking something is wrong with their kid before they're even set up to intervene. It strikes me as something that sounds innocuous, even beneficial, on paper but is terrible when actually implemented as policy.
Someone posted on the askpsychology sub asking if having an abortion is traumatic and it's going as well as you might have predicted. Hoo boy.
Edit: ooh, the mods are pruning comments left and right.
Edit: ooh, the mods are pruning comments left and right.
Last edited:
Ah, yeah, the bolded part is definitely the issue here. Seems like a whole bunch of stress could've been avoided if they'd just explained rather than seemingly panic-referring (or at least making it seem like that was the case).
Yeah, it's strange though because all the stuff I looked up later didn't show he was out of any typical windows. It was all quite weird. I love being able to help with training new doctors. I don't think I have the fortitude to do it with my kiddo though. They are really attentive and lovely 90% of the time. That 10% can be rough. I was given two rounds of glucose testing when I was pregnant because...reasons? I passed the first round. Now I do a quick browse of general standards before I agree to things that don't sound right.
It was pretty funny that baby Shiori managed to pee on all the new doctors rounding because they hadn't mastered newborn diaper changing yet.
Hooking people up to fancy doodads that look cool but don't actually mean anything.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Apparently, some people are opposed to inpatient eating disorder treatment as a concept and don't think extremely low body weight can be life threatening.
Watching a defendant (now convicted) elect pro se representation for a death penalty penalty phase, and the judge is like "Are you sure you don't want competent representation for this? We can get you competent representation for free. They are available and extremely competent and experienced. Are you absoluely sure you don't want that?" Clearly he's trying to not get anything overturned on appeal, but it's still interesting to watch.
Similar threads
