<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Mental Retardation: A Stigmatizing Label</title>
	<atom:link href="http://behaviorismandmentalhealth.com/2009/12/06/mental-retardation-a-stigmatizing-label/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://behaviorismandmentalhealth.com/2009/12/06/mental-retardation-a-stigmatizing-label/</link>
	<description>An alternative perspective on mental disorders &#124; PHILIP HICKEY, PH.D.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 22:13:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Phil</title>
		<link>http://behaviorismandmentalhealth.com/2009/12/06/mental-retardation-a-stigmatizing-label/#comment-1096</link>
		<dc:creator>Phil</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2011 15:51:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://behaviorismandmentalhealth.com/?p=103#comment-1096</guid>
		<description>Sam,

Thanks for your comment.  When you say that mental retardation is “God’s will,” you are, in effect, proposing an explanatory concept – a framework in which the phenomenon of mental retardation makes sense.  Personally I find the “God’s will” type explanation unhelpful from the explanatory point of view and a real hindrance to progress from the practical point of view.  The fact is that a certain percentage of mental retardation is caused by environmental and other toxins  Asserting that mental retardation is a specific expression of “God’s will” obscures the true causality and removes the incentive to investigate true causes and pursue genuine remediation.

Almost all of the individuals categorized as mentally retarded are capable (with appropriate support and training) of expanding their knowledge base and their range of intellectual and practical skills.  In the case of those individuals where the retardation is caused by profound brain damage obviously the potential is extremely limited.  It has been suggested that stem cell therapy may offer some possible remediation in the future.  We’ll have to wait and see.

Once again, thanks for your comment.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sam,</p>
<p>Thanks for your comment.  When you say that mental retardation is “God’s will,” you are, in effect, proposing an explanatory concept – a framework in which the phenomenon of mental retardation makes sense.  Personally I find the “God’s will” type explanation unhelpful from the explanatory point of view and a real hindrance to progress from the practical point of view.  The fact is that a certain percentage of mental retardation is caused by environmental and other toxins  Asserting that mental retardation is a specific expression of “God’s will” obscures the true causality and removes the incentive to investigate true causes and pursue genuine remediation.</p>
<p>Almost all of the individuals categorized as mentally retarded are capable (with appropriate support and training) of expanding their knowledge base and their range of intellectual and practical skills.  In the case of those individuals where the retardation is caused by profound brain damage obviously the potential is extremely limited.  It has been suggested that stem cell therapy may offer some possible remediation in the future.  We’ll have to wait and see.</p>
<p>Once again, thanks for your comment.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sam</title>
		<link>http://behaviorismandmentalhealth.com/2009/12/06/mental-retardation-a-stigmatizing-label/#comment-1079</link>
		<dc:creator>Sam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Jun 2011 18:40:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://behaviorismandmentalhealth.com/?p=103#comment-1079</guid>
		<description>I feel so weak when I saw a person who is mentally retarded. Its unfair to them but its still a God&#039;s will. Does mentally retarded can be cure by any means?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I feel so weak when I saw a person who is mentally retarded. Its unfair to them but its still a God&#8217;s will. Does mentally retarded can be cure by any means?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Phil</title>
		<link>http://behaviorismandmentalhealth.com/2009/12/06/mental-retardation-a-stigmatizing-label/#comment-1044</link>
		<dc:creator>Phil</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Jun 2011 23:53:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://behaviorismandmentalhealth.com/?p=103#comment-1044</guid>
		<description>Frederick,

Thanks for your insightful comment.

Of course some of the individuals classified as mentally retarded do indeed have something wrong with their brains, but many do not.  The systematic medicalization of low intelligence, together with the widespread use of IQ’s (as an actual number) encourages a pessimistic mindset which simply isn’t warranted in many cases.

A compounding problem is that a “diagnosis” of mental retardation can serve as a basis for disability status with the Social Security Administration.  Now I don’t begrudge these individuals help – financial and otherwise – but I think it’s a pity that in order to receive this help they have to be shoe-horned into a “mental disorder” category that is stigmatizing them and has the general effect of reducing expectations.

Best wishes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Frederick,</p>
<p>Thanks for your insightful comment.</p>
<p>Of course some of the individuals classified as mentally retarded do indeed have something wrong with their brains, but many do not.  The systematic medicalization of low intelligence, together with the widespread use of IQ’s (as an actual number) encourages a pessimistic mindset which simply isn’t warranted in many cases.</p>
<p>A compounding problem is that a “diagnosis” of mental retardation can serve as a basis for disability status with the Social Security Administration.  Now I don’t begrudge these individuals help – financial and otherwise – but I think it’s a pity that in order to receive this help they have to be shoe-horned into a “mental disorder” category that is stigmatizing them and has the general effect of reducing expectations.</p>
<p>Best wishes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frederick Chu</title>
		<link>http://behaviorismandmentalhealth.com/2009/12/06/mental-retardation-a-stigmatizing-label/#comment-1017</link>
		<dc:creator>Frederick Chu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Jun 2011 14:22:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://behaviorismandmentalhealth.com/?p=103#comment-1017</guid>
		<description>&quot;Their brains are fine, they are just not as efficient as those of brighter people, in just the same way, for instance, that one person’s lungs, heart, muscles, etc., might work better than another’s.&quot;

Never thought of it like this, but its very true.  Not everyone is bright, or even average, just like not everyone is athletic.  Imagine if everyone who couldn&#039;t run a Mile in under 10 minutes was diagnosed as physically handicapped.

Granted, its probably easier to improve your mile time than it is to improve brain function, but still by diagnosing all low IQ people as having a disorder, there is clearly the problem of the self fulfilling prophecy rearing its ugly head.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Their brains are fine, they are just not as efficient as those of brighter people, in just the same way, for instance, that one person’s lungs, heart, muscles, etc., might work better than another’s.&#8221;</p>
<p>Never thought of it like this, but its very true.  Not everyone is bright, or even average, just like not everyone is athletic.  Imagine if everyone who couldn&#8217;t run a Mile in under 10 minutes was diagnosed as physically handicapped.</p>
<p>Granted, its probably easier to improve your mile time than it is to improve brain function, but still by diagnosing all low IQ people as having a disorder, there is clearly the problem of the self fulfilling prophecy rearing its ugly head.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: grand rounds 6.11 &#8211; the broadway edition &#171; nuts for healthcare: a healthcare blog</title>
		<link>http://behaviorismandmentalhealth.com/2009/12/06/mental-retardation-a-stigmatizing-label/#comment-57</link>
		<dc:creator>grand rounds 6.11 &#8211; the broadway edition &#171; nuts for healthcare: a healthcare blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 01:48:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://behaviorismandmentalhealth.com/?p=103#comment-57</guid>
		<description>[...] his blog Behaviorism and Mental Health, Philip Hickey questions certain aspects of the diagnosis of mental retardation.  First off, why [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] his blog Behaviorism and Mental Health, Philip Hickey questions certain aspects of the diagnosis of mental retardation.  First off, why [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Phil</title>
		<link>http://behaviorismandmentalhealth.com/2009/12/06/mental-retardation-a-stigmatizing-label/#comment-56</link>
		<dc:creator>Phil</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 20:24:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://behaviorismandmentalhealth.com/?p=103#comment-56</guid>
		<description>Mysadalterego:  Thanks for your question.

When I wrote the blog I had pulled that statistic from memory, and I have not been able to find a confirming source.  The DSM itself says:  “In approximately 30-40% of individuals seen in clinical settings, no clear etiology for the mental retardation can be determined despite extensive evaluation efforts.” (DSM-IV-TR, p 45)

Most authorities, however, quote higher figures.  Ullmann and Krasner (A Psychological Approach to Abnormal Behavior, 1975) state:  “The majority of retardates, approximately 75%, do &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; reveal any known physiological syndrome.”  Valdosta State University, Georgia, under &lt;a href=&quot;http://chiron.valdosta.edu/dbriihl/intro12anotes.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Causes of Mental Retardation&lt;/a&gt;, states:  “cultural-familial retardation: about 75%.” (Cultural-familial is a residual category for cases where no physical etiology has been identified.)  &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.uab.edu/cogdev/mentreta.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Biasini&lt;/a&gt; et al (Mental Retardation: A symptom and  syndrome) state that in severe retardation “…30 to 40% of cases, the cause is reported to be unknown” while in mild retardation “between 45 and 63% of the cases are attributed to unknown etiology.  (The area has been extensively studied, and you can find lots of similar references in the literature.)

So I don’t know where I got 50% - perhaps I had just combined these various numbers in a kind of senile blur.

My essential point is that a large proportion (approximately half) of the individuals who carry this diagnosis have nothing medically wrong with them.  Or to be more precise:  nothing that has caused their low intelligence.  Their diagnosis of mental retardation is a result of the artifactual way that the diagnosis is assigned.  What the DSM does is shoehorn these individuals into a medical category even though their problems are not medical.  The diagnosis of mental retardation communicates a sense of hopelessness and helplessness which is unwarranted.

It’s a particularly complex and thorny area, because a diagnosis of mental retardation is considered a disability and qualifies an individual for a social security income, and I’m certainly not advocating anything that would result in increased hardship for these people.  At the present time the only kind of disability recognized by the US Social Security Administration is &lt;em&gt;medical&lt;/em&gt; disability.  I would like to see this definition expanded to include areas such as low intelligence, so that these individuals could receive services and financial assistance without the pretense that they have a medical problem. 

I think that the term mental retardation should simply be eliminated.  The individuals who have a medical/physical etiology should be identified as such (e.g. microcephaly with severe functional limitations).  And people with no physical problem/etiology should receive services and assistance under a different category.

Developing the theme further, I think the notion of identifying different kinds of disability is an important one.  Habitual criminals, for instance, could be considered to be disabled in the sense that they don&#039;t seem to have the same intuitive respect for the rights and comforts of others that the rest of us take for granted.  Traditionally we conceptualize these individuals as simply “bad” and put them in prison (where they usually become “badder”).  If we could promote the notion that these individuals were lacking something that most of us learn in childhood, then we might have more success with this population.  DSM, of course, conceptualizes them as having a mental illness (conduct disorder, intermittent explosive disorder, antisocial personality disorder, etc.), but their problems are clearly not medical in nature and the medical model has had little success with these kinds of problems.

Anyway, as always, one thing leads to another.  Thanks for your comment.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mysadalterego:  Thanks for your question.</p>
<p>When I wrote the blog I had pulled that statistic from memory, and I have not been able to find a confirming source.  The DSM itself says:  “In approximately 30-40% of individuals seen in clinical settings, no clear etiology for the mental retardation can be determined despite extensive evaluation efforts.” (DSM-IV-TR, p 45)</p>
<p>Most authorities, however, quote higher figures.  Ullmann and Krasner (A Psychological Approach to Abnormal Behavior, 1975) state:  “The majority of retardates, approximately 75%, do <em>not</em> reveal any known physiological syndrome.”  Valdosta State University, Georgia, under <a href="http://chiron.valdosta.edu/dbriihl/intro12anotes.htm" rel="nofollow">Causes of Mental Retardation</a>, states:  “cultural-familial retardation: about 75%.” (Cultural-familial is a residual category for cases where no physical etiology has been identified.)  <a href="http://www.uab.edu/cogdev/mentreta.htm" rel="nofollow">Biasini</a> et al (Mental Retardation: A symptom and  syndrome) state that in severe retardation “…30 to 40% of cases, the cause is reported to be unknown” while in mild retardation “between 45 and 63% of the cases are attributed to unknown etiology.  (The area has been extensively studied, and you can find lots of similar references in the literature.)</p>
<p>So I don’t know where I got 50% &#8211; perhaps I had just combined these various numbers in a kind of senile blur.</p>
<p>My essential point is that a large proportion (approximately half) of the individuals who carry this diagnosis have nothing medically wrong with them.  Or to be more precise:  nothing that has caused their low intelligence.  Their diagnosis of mental retardation is a result of the artifactual way that the diagnosis is assigned.  What the DSM does is shoehorn these individuals into a medical category even though their problems are not medical.  The diagnosis of mental retardation communicates a sense of hopelessness and helplessness which is unwarranted.</p>
<p>It’s a particularly complex and thorny area, because a diagnosis of mental retardation is considered a disability and qualifies an individual for a social security income, and I’m certainly not advocating anything that would result in increased hardship for these people.  At the present time the only kind of disability recognized by the US Social Security Administration is <em>medical</em> disability.  I would like to see this definition expanded to include areas such as low intelligence, so that these individuals could receive services and financial assistance without the pretense that they have a medical problem. </p>
<p>I think that the term mental retardation should simply be eliminated.  The individuals who have a medical/physical etiology should be identified as such (e.g. microcephaly with severe functional limitations).  And people with no physical problem/etiology should receive services and assistance under a different category.</p>
<p>Developing the theme further, I think the notion of identifying different kinds of disability is an important one.  Habitual criminals, for instance, could be considered to be disabled in the sense that they don&#8217;t seem to have the same intuitive respect for the rights and comforts of others that the rest of us take for granted.  Traditionally we conceptualize these individuals as simply “bad” and put them in prison (where they usually become “badder”).  If we could promote the notion that these individuals were lacking something that most of us learn in childhood, then we might have more success with this population.  DSM, of course, conceptualizes them as having a mental illness (conduct disorder, intermittent explosive disorder, antisocial personality disorder, etc.), but their problems are clearly not medical in nature and the medical model has had little success with these kinds of problems.</p>
<p>Anyway, as always, one thing leads to another.  Thanks for your comment.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mysadalterego</title>
		<link>http://behaviorismandmentalhealth.com/2009/12/06/mental-retardation-a-stigmatizing-label/#comment-55</link>
		<dc:creator>mysadalterego</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Dec 2009 13:15:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://behaviorismandmentalhealth.com/?p=103#comment-55</guid>
		<description>Where did the 50% have no other disorder statistic come from?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Where did the 50% have no other disorder statistic come from?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

