Shyness and Grieving are Mental Illnesses?

Fox released this story today, which says that under the new revision of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), a large number of things never thought to be mental illnesses will be classified as such. For instance, shyness and even grief may be considered mental illnesses. Perhaps what is more dangerous is the fact that it will "medicalize criminality," which means that rather than being treated as bad people, criminals will be considered mentally ill. In other words, criminals will not be able to be held accountable for their actions--human responsibility will be removed. Therefore, evil behavior is not due to any moral corruption, but to physiological malfunction. If we make mental illness the rule rather than the exception in explaining crime, we fling open wide a door to allow any unpopular behavior to be classified as evidence of mental illness. As the article explains,

"At the other end of the spectrum, the new DSM, due out next year, could give medical diagnoses for serial rapists and sex abusers - under labels like "paraphilic coercive disorder" - and may allow offenders to escape prison by providing what could be seen as an excuse for their behavior, they added."

Consider the political benefits of redefining certain behaviors and attitudes. With a tweak of definition, whole sectors of society could easily be marginalized and discredited. Those who raise moral challenges become blank-phobic (pick your poison) or suffer from a Diversity Resistance Disorder (or how about Ego-Moral Monochromatic Obsessivism? That has a nice ring to it). Those who challenge pet government policies suffer from an anti-social defiant disorder or from a kind of religious mania.

In any case, as usual, G.K. Chesterton saw this danger at the start of the 20th century. In fact, his novel, The Ball and the Cross (written in 1906, I believe), is built upon this very theme of madness as a means to power. In The Ball and the Cross, two Scotsmen, a staunch Atheist and a staunch Roman Catholic, want nothing more than to settle their religious differences. The establishment (both the medical and political), however, considers their behavior to be an expression of a religious mania. By the end of the novel, both the Atheist and the Roman Catholic find themselves in an asylum simply because they take religion seriously--the Atheist thinks it a serious error, and the Catholic a serious truth. In any case, Chesterton does demonstrate, however unlikely his story may be, that whoever controls the definition of madness controls the whole of society. (Put the book on your summer reading list; it's worth reading several times.)

If ideas are worth fighting for, so are the words we use to express ideas. And if words are worth a battle, so are their definitions. This battle is one that I hope the revised DSM loses, and loses badly.