By Bruce E. Levine, AlterNet, February 20, 2012
In my career as a psychologist, I have talked with hundreds of people previously diagnosed by other professionals with oppositional defiant disorder, attention deficit hyperactive disorder, anxiety disorder and other psychiatric illnesses, and I am struck by 1) how many of those diagnosed are essentially anti-authoritarians; and 2) how those professionals who have diagnosed them are not.
In my career as a psychologist, I have talked with hundreds of people previously diagnosed by other professionals with oppositional defiant disorder, attention deficit hyperactive disorder, anxiety disorder and other psychiatric illnesses, and I am struck by 1) how many of those diagnosed are essentially anti-authoritarians; and 2) how those professionals who have diagnosed them are not.
Anti-authoritarians question whether an authority is a legitimate one
before taking that authority seriously. Evaluating the legitimacy of
authorities includes assessing whether or not authorities actually know what
they are talking about, are honest, and care about those people who are
respecting their authority. And when anti-authoritarians assess an authority to
be illegitimate, they challenge and resist that authority—sometimes
aggressively and sometimes passive-aggressively, sometimes wisely and sometimes
not.
Some activists lament how few anti-authoritarians there appear to be in
the United States. One reason could be that many natural anti-authoritarians
are now psychopathologized and medicated before they achieve political
consciousness of society’s most oppressive authorities.
Gaining acceptance into graduate school or medical school and achieving
a PhD or MD and becoming a psychologist or psychiatrist means jumping through
many hoops, all of which require much behavioral and attentional compliance
with authorities, even those authorities one lacks respect for. The selection
and socialization of mental health professionals tends to breed out many
anti-authoritarians. Degrees and credentials are primarily badges of
compliance. Those with extended schooling have lived for many years in a world
where one routinely conforms to the demands of authorities. Thus for many MDs
and PhDs, people different from them who reject this attentional and behavioral
compliance appear to be from another world—a diagnosable one.
I have found that most psychologists, psychiatrists and other mental
health professionals are not only extraordinarily compliant with authorities
but also unaware of the magnitude of their obedience. And it also has become
clear to me that the anti-authoritarianism of their patients creates enormous
anxiety for these professionals, and their anxiety fuels diagnoses and
treatments.
In graduate school, I discovered that all it took to be labeled as
having “issues with authority” was not fawning on a director of clinical
training whose personality was a combination of Donald Trump, Newt Gingrich and
Howard Cosell. When I was told by some faculty that I had “issues with
authority,” I had mixed feelings about being so labeled. On the one hand, I
found it amusing, because among the working-class kids I had grown up with, I
was considered relatively compliant with authorities. After all, I had done my
homework, studied and received good grades. However, while my new “issues with
authority” label made me grin because I was now being seen as a “bad boy,” I
was also concerned about just what kind of profession I had entered.
Specifically, if somebody such as myself was labeled as having “issues with
authority,” what were they calling the kids I grew up with who paid attention
to many things that they cared about but didn’t care enough about school to
comply there? Well, the answer soon became clear.
A 2009 Psychiatric Times article titled “ADHD & ODD: Confronting the
Challenges of Disruptive Behavior” reports that “disruptive disorders,” which
include attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and opposition defiant
disorder (ODD), are the most common mental health problem of children and
teenagers. ADHD is defined by poor attention and distractibility, poor self-control
and impulsivity, and hyperactivity. ODD is defined as a “a pattern of
negativistic, hostile, and defiant behavior without the more serious violations
of the basic rights of others that are seen in conduct disorder”; and ODD
symptoms include “often actively defies or refuses to comply with adult
requests or rules” and “often argues with adults.”
Psychologist Russell Barkley, one of mainstream mental health’s leading
authorities on ADHD, says that those afflicted with ADHD have deficits in what
he calls “rule-governed behavior,” as they are less responsive to rules of
established authorities and less sensitive to positive or negative
consequences. ODD young people, according to mainstream mental health
authorities, also have these so-called deficits in rule-governed behavior, and
so it is extremely common for young people to have a “dual diagnosis” of AHDH
and ODD.
Do we really want to diagnose and medicate everyone with “deficits in
rule-governed behavior”?
Albert Einstein, as a youth, would have likely received an ADHD
diagnosis, and maybe an ODD one as well. Albert didn’t pay attention to his
teachers, failed his college entrance examinations twice, and had difficulty
holding jobs. However, Einstein biographer Ronald Clark (Einstein: The Life and
Times) asserts that Albert’s problems did not stem from attention deficits but
rather from his hatred of authoritarian, Prussian discipline in his schools.
Einstein said, “The teachers in the elementary school appeared to me like
sergeants and in the Gymnasium the teachers were like lieutenants.” At age 13,
Einstein read Kant’s difficult Critique of Pure Reason—because he was
interested in it. Clark also tells us Einstein refused to prepare himself for
his college admissions as a rebellion against his father’s “unbearable” path of
a “practical profession.” After he did enter college, one professor told
Einstein, “You have one fault; one can’t tell you anything.” The very
characteristics of Einstein that upset authorities so much were exactly the
ones that allowed him to excel.
By today’s standards, Saul Alinsky, the legendary organizer and author
of Reveille for Radicals and Rules for Radicals, would have certainly been
diagnosed with one or more disruptive disorders. Recalling his childhood,
Alinsky said, “I never thought of walking on the grass until I saw a sign
saying ‘Keep off the grass.’ Then I would stomp all over it.” Alinsky also
recalls a time when he was 10 or 11 and his rabbi was tutoring him in Hebrew:
One particular day I read three pages in a row without any errors in
pronunciation, and suddenly a penny fell onto the Bible….Then the next day the
rabbi turned up and he told me to start reading. And I wouldn’t; I just sat
there in silence, refusing to read. He asked me why I was so quiet, and I said,
“This time it’s a nickel or nothing.” He threw back his arm and slammed me
across the room.
Many anti-authoritarians who earlier in their lives were diagnosed with
mental illness tell me that once they were labeled with a psychiatric
diagnosis, they got caught in a dilemma. Authoritarians, by definition, demand
unquestioning obedience, and so any resistance to their diagnosis and treatment
created enormous anxiety for authoritarian mental health professionals; and
professionals, feeling out of control, labeled them “noncompliant with
treatment,” increased the severity of their diagnosis, and jacked up their
medications. This was enraging for these anti-authoritarians, sometimes so much
so that they reacted in ways that made them appear even more frightening to their
families.
It has been my experience that many anti-authoritarians labeled with
psychiatric diagnoses usually don’t reject all authorities, simply those
they’ve assessed to be illegitimate ones, which just happens to be a great deal
of society’s authorities.
Americans have been increasingly socialized to equate inattention,
anger, anxiety, and immobilizing despair with a medical condition, and to seek
medical treatment rather than political remedies. What better way to maintain
the status quo than to view inattention, anger, anxiety, and depression as
biochemical problems of those who are mentally ill rather than normal reactions
to an increasingly authoritarian society?
The reality is that depression is highly associated with societal and
financial pains. One is much more likely to be depressed if one is unemployed,
underemployed, on public assistance, or in debt. And ADHD-labeled kids do pay
attention when they are getting paid, or when an activity is novel, interests
them, or is chosen by them (documented in my book Commonsense Rebellion).
Americans desperately need anti-authoritarians to question, challenge,
and resist new illegitimate authorities and regain confidence in their own
common sense.
In every generation there will be authoritarians and anti-authoritarians.
While it is unusual in American history for anti-authoritarians to take the
kind of effective action that inspires others to successfully revolt, every
once in a while a Tom Paine, Crazy Horse or Malcolm X come along. So
authoritarians financially marginalize those who buck the system, they
criminalize anti-authoritarianism, they psychopathologize anti-authoritarians,
and they market drugs for their “cure.”
Bruce E. Levine is a clinical psychologist and author of Get Up, Stand
Up: Uniting Populists, Energizing the Defeated, and Battling the Corporate
Elite (Chelsea Green, 2011).
No comments:
Post a Comment