"Are You Sick? No, I am Neurodivergent!" The Perilous Navigation Between Medicalization and Diagnostic Nihilism.

IF 2 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Alfonso Troisi
{"title":"\"Are You Sick? No, I am Neurodivergent!\" The Perilous Navigation Between Medicalization and Diagnostic Nihilism.","authors":"Alfonso Troisi","doi":"10.36131/cnfioritieditore20250101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>When advocating to fight stigma and promote acceptance of neurodivergent individuals, the current debate on neurodiversity does not present a major challenge to psychiatric theory and research. The controversy arises when neurodiversity is taken to its extreme, denying the existence of neurodevelopmental disorders. Evolutionary psychiatry has recently contributed to the neurodiversity debate by providing adaptive explanations. These explanations are based on the unproven assumption that neurodiversity has been shaped by natural selection, as some atypical neurocognitive profiles increased inclusive fitness in the ancestral environment. Evolutionary psychiatry recognizes the heterogeneity of neurodiversity, acknowledges the existence of neurodevelopmental disorders, and establishes fitness disadvantage as the criterion of morbidity. The evolutionary definition of pathological neurodiversity is based on an objective criterion but it has limited utility in clinical practice. Cultural relativism has always played a role in the history of medicine and psychiatry, often overshadowing scientific analysis. Therapeutic concerns are influenced by cultural trends that can lean towards either medicalization or diagnostic nihilism.</p>","PeriodicalId":46700,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Neuropsychiatry","volume":"22 1","pages":"5-8"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11956879/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Neuropsychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36131/cnfioritieditore20250101","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

When advocating to fight stigma and promote acceptance of neurodivergent individuals, the current debate on neurodiversity does not present a major challenge to psychiatric theory and research. The controversy arises when neurodiversity is taken to its extreme, denying the existence of neurodevelopmental disorders. Evolutionary psychiatry has recently contributed to the neurodiversity debate by providing adaptive explanations. These explanations are based on the unproven assumption that neurodiversity has been shaped by natural selection, as some atypical neurocognitive profiles increased inclusive fitness in the ancestral environment. Evolutionary psychiatry recognizes the heterogeneity of neurodiversity, acknowledges the existence of neurodevelopmental disorders, and establishes fitness disadvantage as the criterion of morbidity. The evolutionary definition of pathological neurodiversity is based on an objective criterion but it has limited utility in clinical practice. Cultural relativism has always played a role in the history of medicine and psychiatry, often overshadowing scientific analysis. Therapeutic concerns are influenced by cultural trends that can lean towards either medicalization or diagnostic nihilism.

“你生病了吗?”不,我是神经发散者!”在医学化和诊断虚无主义之间的危险导航。
当提倡对抗污名并促进对神经分化个体的接受时,目前关于神经多样性的争论并没有对精神病学理论和研究提出重大挑战。当神经多样性被发挥到极致,否认神经发育障碍的存在时,争论就出现了。进化精神病学最近通过提供适应性解释,对神经多样性的争论做出了贡献。这些解释是基于一个未经证实的假设,即神经多样性是由自然选择形成的,因为一些非典型的神经认知特征增加了祖先环境中的包容性适应性。进化精神病学承认神经多样性的异质性,承认神经发育障碍的存在,并将健康劣势作为发病的标准。病理神经多样性的进化定义是基于客观标准的,但它在临床实践中的效用有限。文化相对主义在医学和精神病学的历史上一直扮演着重要的角色,常常使科学分析蒙上阴影。治疗问题受到文化趋势的影响,可能倾向于医学化或诊断虚无主义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Clinical Neuropsychiatry
Clinical Neuropsychiatry CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
11.10
自引率
1.60%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信