What, you mean if someone says something mean to me, I can’t diagnose them with NPD right there? /s
nope. narcissism is not a disability, according to a quick google search.
No offense intended, but that’s kind of a shitty way to answer questions about bioethics. I feel like a few years back that would have linked you to Yahoo! Answers.
Much better, but still, it’s not the kind of question that can be answered with an appeal to authority. I could look inside for their reasoning, but paywall.
Edit: I’m poking around a bit for a preprint or something, but kind of coming up empty. I was more hoping to start a discussion here, anyway.
Like, if a disability is a permanent medical condition that makes it hard to live a normal life, shouldn’t cluster B disorders count? A niggle for narcissism is that they often become more successful in life than control populations, which is horrifying, but you could sub in disorganised sociopaths or whatever non-DSM group of neuroatypical deviants you want.
If it is a disability, does that change how we treat them? I’d actually guess not, you don’t let blind people drive taxis, after all. Damage reduction still takes precedence over personal freedom.
From what I’ve read it should be considered a disability in my opinion.
But it seems it was removed from the DSM with some psychologists and psychiatrists saying it wasn’t a legitimate condition/disability. (what the NYT article covers)
nope. narcissism is not a disability, according to a quick google search.
And even so NPD the clinical diagnosis is very different from what layman call “narcissism”.
What, you mean if someone says something mean to me, I can’t diagnose them with NPD right there? /s
No offense intended, but that’s kind of a shitty way to answer questions about bioethics. I feel like a few years back that would have linked you to Yahoo! Answers.
source was comittee on personality disorders https://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/30/health/views/30mind.html
Much better, but still, it’s not the kind of question that can be answered with an appeal to authority. I could look inside for their reasoning, but paywall.
Edit: I’m poking around a bit for a preprint or something, but kind of coming up empty. I was more hoping to start a discussion here, anyway.
Like, if a disability is a permanent medical condition that makes it hard to live a normal life, shouldn’t cluster B disorders count? A niggle for narcissism is that they often become more successful in life than control populations, which is horrifying, but you could sub in disorganised sociopaths or whatever non-DSM group of neuroatypical deviants you want.
If it is a disability, does that change how we treat them? I’d actually guess not, you don’t let blind people drive taxis, after all. Damage reduction still takes precedence over personal freedom.
From what I’ve read it should be considered a disability in my opinion.
But it seems it was removed from the DSM with some psychologists and psychiatrists saying it wasn’t a legitimate condition/disability. (what the NYT article covers)