Re: Q&A 1 DID

Just because I know you're probably doing some sort of school project on this:

I can't decide, just yet. It calls upon the entire "temporary insanity" excitement. I suppose the only way you can really draw the line is with something subjective, like the DSM. It's the only preexisting diagnostic tool fit to handle this kind of conversation. Otherwise, you're going to encounter issues regarding various levels of psychosis or whatever you'd want to call it.

Take serial killers. We've proven that their brains function differently, so how can we determine that someone experiencing temporary insanity or someone suffering from DID is not liable for their actions and someone with an anatomically different brain be held accountable for killing? That's where the DSM comes in handy with a definitive yes-no in regards to whether something is classified as a syndrome.

Unfortunately, the primary use of the DSM is insurance, which is really not a comparable paradigm. So, hell, let 'em off the hook. Put 'em in treatment (because they probably should be). If the argument against holding them accountable (presumably, jailing) is that it's unethical, because they can't control themselves, that doesn't mean it's unethical to hospitalize them or something. It's protective, it's beneficial, and it's more ethical. Hopefully.

But hey, what do I know?