What do you call addiction? You call it addiction
As I mentioned in my previous post, the next edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) will significantly change diagnoses related to alcohol and drugs. No longer will the diagnosis of abuse exist, but instead we will have one category or diagnosis of problematic substance use behavior with varying degrees of severity. At issue is what to call this disorder.
Presently, the term addiction does not appear anywhere in the DSM, but instead the term dependence is used to describe behavior that traditionally invovles compulsive use, loss of control, and continued use despite consequences. Unfortunately, the term also describes a normal process that has nothing to do with problematic behavior or addiction, such as a person who becomes “dependent” on insulin for diabetes, or pain medicines for chronic pain. In these instances, the term dependence describes something entirely different than what is in the DSM. So what to do?
It sounds likely that the upcoming new version of the DSM will use the term addiction and drop dependence because of its dual meaning. Other terms including appetitive disorders have been thrown around, but this label would require significant public education. Those who are against using the term addiction say: (1) it carries too much stigma, (2) has no clear scientific definition, and (3) is overly identified with drug abuse instead of capturing the full range of excessive behavioral problems (e.g., sex, food, gambling).
In truth, there is no perfect term, but at least addiction is a commonly used term that most understand, even if it presently is not associated with a universally agreed upon definition. I support using the term, but also believe the field needs to evolve its thinking and define addiction more broadly to include the full range of problematic behaviors that go beyond just drugs and alcohol. At CPDD speakers suggested gambling will be included in the new diagnosis, and potentially internet addiction in the near future, but sex and food – perhaps the two most powerful addictions due to their link with our survival – will likely not make the cut.
What does this mean? It means that politics win over science and many folks who need help will not receive it because insurance companies will have a reason not to pay for something if it is not officially in the DSM and/or does not have the right diagnostic codes.
I believe that addiction is the best term to use. It is associated with ATOD, and is commonly used in organizations, clinics and communities. It is sad to here that the politics behind this will unfortunately limit the addiction term, and keep out food, and sex. I hope that in the near future policy makers will see the benefit to adding these addictions to the list.
I agree that the term addiction is the most known definition for the abuse of drugs. I am in favor of taking the politics out of a subject that is scientific, medical and behavioral. Insurance companies need to get on board and provide services to the customers that they are paid for and the only way to get around the hang-ups is to not get political.
I’m going to have to agree on addiction. I have a husband with a severe problem with addiction and there is so much information floating around. Much of this information addresses addiction as if walking on eggshells. Addiction is a serious problem and it must be addressed head-on. My family is being torn apart by this problem and there is so much that a person has to go through in order to have this addressed as a true problem and not just a personal choice.
An addiction affects every aspect of a persons life and should be seen as an incredibly important and potentially catastrophic problem.
I too support that we should just call addiction an addiction. Again, it is really frustrating when science which can be tested, measured, and is valid can be disregarded? With sex & food being major categories in addiction they should definitely be in the addictions category. To not include them would be a problem. I think a lot of it has to do w/society and what has been adopted under the addictions category…because of politics we don’t look at the criteria for addiction we look at the object, and that doesn’t bring about resolution. I am very weary about what the new DSM will bring as I think it is difficult enough to inform clients, but to deal w/the DSM errors or what not and that is supposed to be a good reference tool for me as a counselor? That’s a bit scary