Being critical of OCD as a diagnosis?

[codrot]

I'm trying to ask this question as respectfully as possible. I know and recognise that receiving OCD as a diagnosis can feel really liberating and helpful to people who are suffering. It can give them access to help, be it talking therapy of some kind or even drugs. Knowing that there is a name for something that you experience as suffering can really help. 

What I'm curious about is if there are any "OCD" sufferers who are critical of the term itself, or if you ever think about this? I feel like using the term can sometimes be a kind of full stop to thinking about my symptoms. The reasons why I might have intrusive thoughts to me feel like a very complicated story that involves the whole history of me as a person, and sometimes just focusing on the surface level of the symptom is kind of like a full stop to thinking about it. Rather than seeing OCD as something that has hit me out of a blue sky and is something that I carry around me like a box inside my head, I rather think that it is something that I am, and have always been. I don't really feel like I am disordered in anyway, so I kind of reject the term. Yet I accept it in some circumstances just in order to access help. 

Again I'm not criticising anyone for accepting the term, I'm just curious if others ever think about this. Thanks  

[Angst]

The very issues you mention are mentioned in a pamphlet published by the British Psychological Society (BPS) Division of Clinical Psychology which is entitled ‘Understanding Psychiatric Diagnosis in Adult Mental Health’.  You are right: the crucial thing about a diagnosis is that it provides access to help and the pamphlet mentions this.

Personally in the case of OCD I find the term helpful. As well as the recommended treatment for the diagnosis.
 

There was a lot of debate about another BPS publication called ‘Power Threat Meaning Framework’ which sought to stress symptoms rather than diagnoses. This publication caused a furore in the twitter sphere amongst mental health specialists and others.

All these publications are open access just put the names into a search engine.

Edited March 9, 2021 by Angst

[PolarBear]

Having a disorder does not mean you are disordered. OCD is a disorder because it interferes with living. 

[codrot]

14 hours ago, Angst said:

The very issues you mention are mentioned in a pamphlet published by the British Psychological Society (BPS) Division of Clinical Psychology which is entitled ‘Understanding Psychiatric Diagnosis in Adult Mental Health’.  You are right: the crucial thing about a diagnosis is that it provides access to help and the pamphlet mentions this.

Personally in the case of OCD I find the term helpful. As well as the recommended treatment for the diagnosis.
 

There was a lot of debate about another BPS publication called ‘Power Threat Meaning Framework’ which sought to stress symptoms rather than diagnoses. This publication caused a furore in the twitter sphere amongst mental health specialists and others.

All these publications are open access just put the names into a search engine.

That's great, thanks for the reading recommendations :) 

[BelAnna]

I have come across a few Psychologists who like to discuss my OCD as 'Patient A has problems with obsessions and compulsions'- I actually much prefer that it's referred to as a disorder- OCD is separate from me. I do take issue with the name of the disorder itself but that's a separate issue.

However you might be right in that it is to do with thinking style, tendency towards rumination etc., which you could consider part of you- I guess in that way it's like having a diagnosis of ADHD or Autistic Spectrum Disorder although if you fully accept that then it suggests the OCD would run a chronic course in most cases and that treatment might not be as effective.