Latest Health News

twenty years ago, even members of the medical profession had a hard time accepting the idea that OCD was a bona fide medical disorder. The difficulty was that OCD, like many other psychiatric disorders, was thought to lack a physical cause. No matter what psychiatrists said, the average physician could not be altogether convinced that a problem without a demonstrable biological basis should be included in the proper domain of medicine.
In those days, OCD stood in apparent contrast to, say, coronary artery disease (CAD), the common cause of heart attacks. CAD’s symptoms, such as chest pain and shortness of breath, were caused by physical changes in the body that could be observed, fatty tissues that clogged the coronary blood vessels. OCD, on the other hand, was caused, according to the authoritative Comprehensive Textbook, of Psychiatry, by “a defensive regression of the psychic apparatus to the preoedipal anal-sadistic phase.” The exact meaning of those Freudian terms was a mystery to everyone but psychiatrists, but it was clear that they did not refer to any sort of biological process. Coronary artery disease was a true medical disorder; OCD was something else.
But times have changed. Over the last two decades, our understanding of OCD has been revolutionized by a series of fascinating and totally unexpected research findings. It is now absolutely clear that OCD is caused not by vague conflicts in the unconscious but rather by measurable chemical abnormalities that occur in specific regions of the brain. OCD, it turns out, is every bit as much a biological process as CAD. No one should any longer doubt that OCD is a distinct medical disorder. Viewing OCD in this way has profound personal and social implications for those who suffer from it. Talcott Parsons, founder of the field of medical anthropology, described these implications in the 1940s. Parsons noted that in every culture people who suffer from physical disorders are dealt with in a special manner. They are relieved of their normal duties, taken care of. They are not blamed for their condition. Their treatment is, all in all, very different from that accorded to people who are recognized as otherwise defective: slackers, weaklings, or criminals.
Yet, many OCDers still think of themselves in just those terms. A few even turn themselves in as criminals! This is because OCDers are so prone to guilt. I once asked Tina, whose severe OCD was discussed in the last chapter, what aspect of her treatment had been most helpful to her. She said that it was learning that she had a “chemical disorder.” Before this, Tina had unmercifully blamed herself for her condition. Her husband had only made matters worse by nagging her, assuming that if she tried harder she could overcome her ridiculous fears. A great weight was lifted from Tina’s shoulders when she learned that het problems were in fact due to a physical problem. The new explanation resonated at a deep level: The symptoms were not her fault. It is of the utmost importance for OCDers, along with their families and the general public, to fully grasp this fact.
*47/338/2*

read comments (0)