Talk:Oppositional defiance disorder

Links
Is drapetomania really relevant to this article? ODD is being used to describe CHILD defiance, not that of slaves.Naruttebayo 21:54, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

It is relevant, because children and slaves are both unempowered demographics, and the diagnosis serves the controlling parties by giving them a way to explain and justify the measures they use to control their respective underclasses. This can be seen as a radical comparison, but it is still apt.


 * Perhaps my comment was out of date; at the time, the Drapetomania link was in the "See Also" section without any sort of reason. It's okay now :)

rewrite for neutrality
This article should be rewritten for neutrality. Removing such words as "supposed" and the quotes around 'mental illness' from the first sentence would achieve a more neutral position for this article. It is fine to include nonbiased reporting of the debate around the use of ODD as a diagnosis, but it's common usage in the medical community warrants more respect. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Onewhostrives (talk • contribs) 13:14, 19 February 2007 (UTC).

I have followed your suggestions for the first sentence-- that does make it a bit more neutral.Gloriamarie 03:36, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Luckily your changes seem to have been reverted. They made the article less neutral. Neutrality doesn't mean taking "common usage" in whatever professionally biased community for granted. Reason, not power is what "should warrant respect". Science is not independent from society. What the medical mainstream calls a "disorder" often tells more about their idea of social order, which is still not really a democratic one. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.162.45.33 (talk) 02:45, 11 March 2007 (UTC).


 * [Don't make this article] neutral, all mental disorder articles should have "quotes" over the whole da*n thing! It should be known that mental "illnesses" are inherently subejective to the society and/or era that it is used in, whereas physical ailments have not shit to do with time or place, unless, of course, one is speaking about the relation medicinal treatment has with time and place. [removed profanity] --PoidLover 10:09, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Awful
Reading this article gives me chills. I did a quick run-through of the "symptoms," and, based on the criteria given, have concluded that I very easily could have been diagnosed with this "disorder" when I was fifteen or sixteen years old. My brother, who is seventeen, could easily be diagnosed with it now.

I mean, think about it; a child who got into an argument with his parents over an unreasonable curfew, or a child who contested a certain punishment or tried to rebel by wearing dyed hair and unusual clothing, could potentially be branded insane!

The transparency of it is unbelievable; you can practically envision a bunch of doctors and parents getting together and saying, "So, how can we keep the teenagers in line?"

Almost any dissent at all on the part of the child could be construed as mental illness.

It shows a supreme arrogance as well, that adults (and, what's more, medical professionals who should and probably do know better) can say, "My moral values and my ways are so right, that any teenager who rejects them must be mentally disturbed."

This is a very dangerous postulation, and the comparison to Drapetomania is well deserved. This disease seems almost hand-crafted to oppress teenagers. My God, I wonder how many kids out there are drugged up or have actually been committed after being diagnosed as victims of this imaginary ailment?

SwedishConqueror 00:03, 7 March 2007 (UTC)SwedishConqueror


 * Totally agree with you, man. I know that all mental disorders are b******t, and anyone's own subjective reality is real in their world; to the people that most would brand insane, they think that the branders are insane themselves. The Christian western world thinks ragheads are insane, and sand n****rs think the Christian Western world is razy as well! Read Brave New World, and you will know: EVERYTHING!!!!!--PoidLover 10:04, 16 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Can we get an academic source for this position? I think it is important. Once we have that, I have a superlative, non-academic citation to put with it, but it really cannot stand alone without primary academic verification? --Zeraeph 13:55, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Acquiescence Disorder?
Is there perhaps a reverse disorder as well, related to shyness, passivity and isolation? The relationship here might be akin to that between hypothermia and hyperthermia; too much either way can be unhealthy. Of course, that said, it's hard to tell where to draw the line between "disorder" and "facet of normal personalities" (in this case, I would probably lean more twoards the "acquiescence" side of things).-- Lenoxus 15:57, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but if the point of the "disorder" is to keep teenagers in line, then none of the adults would have a problem with an adolescent who was overly submissive.

SwedishConqueror 23:24, 1 May 2007 (UTC)SwedishConqueror