Internet addiction disorder (IAD) is a theorized disorder originally made as a satirical hoax by Ivan Goldberg, M.D., in 1995. He took pathological gambling as diagnosed by the DSM-IV as his model for the spoofed description.
Although IAD was meant to be a hoax, some supporters promote it as a real condition. Supporters often divide IAD into subtypes by activity, such as immoderate gaming, inappropriate involvement in online social networking sites or blogging, and Internet shopping addiction. Activities that, if done in person, would normally be considered troublesome, such as compulsive gambling or shopping, are called net compulsions. Others, such as reading or playing computer games, are troubling only to the extent that these activities interfere with normal life.
In many cases, though not all, the problem corrects itself. “It was Professor Kiesler who called Internet addiction a fad illness. In her view, she said, television addiction is worse. She added that she was completing a study of heavy Internet users, which showed the majority had sharply reduced their time on the computer over the course of a year, indicating that even problematic use was self-corrective.” Researcher Kimberly Young, Psy. D. Is lobbying for the inclusion of IAD into the DSM-V, the next edition of the DSM. Some proponents believe that its inclusion would open the doors for private insurance companies to pay for Internet addiction counseling. However, many others argue that IAD is neither a true addiction nor a specific disorder and should not be classified as a mental disorder in DSM-V. Furthermore, there is no evidence that people needing treatment are being denied it; instead, their situations are coded under other labels, such as ADD or depression, according to the underlying situation.
In June 2007, the American Medical Association declined to recommend to the American Psychiatric Association that they include IAD as a formal diagnosis in the 2012 edition of the DSM. Instead, their toned-down response recommended further research of “video game overuse.” Members of the American Society of Addiction Medicine opposed calling Internet overuse and video games a true addiction. Among the necessary research is a way to define “overuse” and a way to differentiate an “internet addiction” from obsession, self-medication for depression or other disorders, and compulsion.
While there is mixed agreement about whether Internet Addiction is a legitimate, simultaneously, self-proclaimed sufferers are resorting to the courts for redress. In one recent American case, the plaintiff argued he was illegally terminated in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act owing to his Internet Addiction triggered by Vietnam War-related Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. The case is pending before the court in the Southern District of New York
Although IAD was meant to be a hoax, some supporters promote it as a real condition. Supporters often divide IAD into subtypes by activity, such as immoderate gaming, inappropriate involvement in online social networking sites or blogging, and Internet shopping addiction. Activities that, if done in person, would normally be considered troublesome, such as compulsive gambling or shopping, are called net compulsions. Others, such as reading or playing computer games, are troubling only to the extent that these activities interfere with normal life.
In many cases, though not all, the problem corrects itself. “It was Professor Kiesler who called Internet addiction a fad illness. In her view, she said, television addiction is worse. She added that she was completing a study of heavy Internet users, which showed the majority had sharply reduced their time on the computer over the course of a year, indicating that even problematic use was self-corrective.” Researcher Kimberly Young, Psy. D. Is lobbying for the inclusion of IAD into the DSM-V, the next edition of the DSM. Some proponents believe that its inclusion would open the doors for private insurance companies to pay for Internet addiction counseling. However, many others argue that IAD is neither a true addiction nor a specific disorder and should not be classified as a mental disorder in DSM-V. Furthermore, there is no evidence that people needing treatment are being denied it; instead, their situations are coded under other labels, such as ADD or depression, according to the underlying situation.
In June 2007, the American Medical Association declined to recommend to the American Psychiatric Association that they include IAD as a formal diagnosis in the 2012 edition of the DSM. Instead, their toned-down response recommended further research of “video game overuse.” Members of the American Society of Addiction Medicine opposed calling Internet overuse and video games a true addiction. Among the necessary research is a way to define “overuse” and a way to differentiate an “internet addiction” from obsession, self-medication for depression or other disorders, and compulsion.
While there is mixed agreement about whether Internet Addiction is a legitimate, simultaneously, self-proclaimed sufferers are resorting to the courts for redress. In one recent American case, the plaintiff argued he was illegally terminated in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act owing to his Internet Addiction triggered by Vietnam War-related Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. The case is pending before the court in the Southern District of New York
Related Links:
Saliva drug test
Marijuana testing
No comments:
Post a Comment