(Report abusive comment)

http://www.aolnews.com/nation/.....?icid=main|main|dl1|link3|http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aolnews.com%2Fnation%2Farticle%2Fbig-changes-proposed-for-diagnostic-and-statistical-manual-of-mental-disorders%2F19352107

(Report abusive comment)

At least this group of criteria is more sensible. It basically allows any of us to go down the list and score how affected someone is by each trait. Bit late for me and for most of us but hopefully this will help others to get out quicker.

Governments seriously need to address this issue – what to do with them. They are NOT FIT for regular society. I wonder whether they should be made to register like sex offenders so the whole community knows where their local psychopaths are residing. And I think laws around psychological abuse need to be tightened somehow. We need some penalty and record for what they do ON PURPOSE to others. Otherwise they just go on their merry way and do it to the next poor sucker. It’s so sick that no government is doing anything about them. They should not be among us.

(Report abusive comment)

I may even agree that psychopaths’ brains are messed up. But even if not to BLAME, they are RESPONSIBLE….and will continue to do what they do unless forcibly stopped.

(Report abusive comment)

I agree with you about the removal of conduct disorder from the list of criteria. In my case, while I was trying to piece together the puzzle of whether my S-ex was in fact an S, I kept trying to dig deeper and deeper into his past trying to uncover evidence of this. At the end I concluded that the way abusive way he treated animals no doubt stemmed from his childhood and animal cruelty in childhood is one of the signs of S, and I let it go at that.

What I should have been focusing on is (a) the fact that he exhibited most every other tendency on the list and (b) his treatment of me in the here and now was so abominable and making me so miserable that I needed to get him out of my life right here and now and not try to figure out the reasons why he was the way he was.

(Report abusive comment)

I think the new criteria are much better – note that the person now doesn’t have to be diagnosed with conduct disorder in youth I was always against that as a criteria because obtaining a diagnosis depends upon
1) the family recognising problems / symptoms
2) the family having the financial and resource means and know how to access the right kind of practitioner who can carry out a full assessment.

The new criteria also recognises the person may or may not break the law – this is new too. Not all of them are caught although many exist on the borderline of the law.

Some families have deep distrust of the medical profession and in particular psychiatrists. I know in my ex’s case, they wouldn’t have sought help for him because such behaviours were normal in the family so there was never going to be a diagnosis.

I wonder if the writers of the DSM are realising the explosion of sociopaths / psychopaths in our communities and the fact that few of them have previous diagnosis of conduct disorders.

(Report abusive comment)

I appreciate BloggerT for sending us this link about the revisions. He’s almost always the first with new articles and links! Thanks!!!!

(Report abusive comment)

(Report abusive comment)

However, I left a comment, a request that they consider adding more information in the section on manipulation. It is really more about their impact on victims than their presenting symptoms, so I don’t know if the writers will even consider it. But I think it would be helpful to us if they did. Here’s the comment I submitted:

I am one of the authors on the LoveFraud blog for people recovering from long-term relationships with sociopaths. I’m also writing a book on the recovery path. Although I’m not a professional, I have been studying personality disorders and recovery for the last ten years.

I am pleased with this revision, and think it is an excellent overview of their symptoms. Many thanks to the people who contributed to this.

There is, however, one factor that is mentioned, but perhaps not with sufficient detail. Under item 3, Manipulativeness, their inclination to use guile and cunning to manipulate people does not include the fact that they use false romantic interest and sexual manipulation. In fact, their romantic and sexual aggression could also appear logically in the section on Aggression.

In the last year or so, a book was published, based on a research project into the experiences of women who become involved with these people. The second part of the book details this research, and may be the best information available on the process of psychopathic seduction and the paths of these relationships. The book’s title is “Women Who Love Psychopaths,” and I strongly suggest you read it before finalizing this criteria.

I think that beyond these intimate relationships, there is also a larger picture of induced collaboration in many venues, including the workplace. These people are lone wolves, predators in the world of feeling people. But they are excellent observers and mimes, and whether consciously or unconsciously, they seduce people into voluntary collaboration by identifying their deepest desires and reflecting them back to them, appearing to be the “answer to a dream.”

Their purpose is to gain trust and dissolve normal protective boundaries. Subsequently they begin to withhold in order to obtain concessions. And eventually, as the victim’s internal structure of self-knowledge and self-esteem begins to crumble, they switch to emotional abuse to keep the “source” in their power. The worst damage to the victim is in the area of relationship with one’s self, because the relationship appears to have been one of personal choice.

Chronic psychopathic behavior is characteristically found anywhere people are exploited without concern for the damage to the victims, and for the pleasure of domination or “winning.” This would include con games, rape, chronic abuse of any kind, etc.

The point being that psychopathy is, ironically, a social disorder. It is about the quality of interaction in the environment of a profound affective disorder, in which there is no trust, no bonding, no understanding of human relationships except in terms of power and supply. And one of the “symptoms” of psychopathy is also the wreckage left in their wake.

One of the reasons I’m writing you is because the criteria you publish will have impact and meaning beyond clinical diagnosis of personality disorders. The modus operandi of psychopaths and the characteristic psychological damage sustained by their victims are virtually unrecognized in the law. This damage is intentional, induced to keep their victims attached to them until their usefulness is exhausted.

If you can see any way to reference their use of psychological seduction or the intentional destruction of victim’s psychological integrity, it would be helpful to us who are trying to build awareness and better laws. It would also provide a caveat to clinicians attempting to deal with them, especially in family practice.

Thank you very much for your attention to my comment. And thank you again for the great work.

Kathleen Hawk

(Report abusive comment)

(Report abusive comment)