Medicalisation: Introversion in the DSM

So after reading that Introversion has been included in the latest version of the DSM, I felt the need to write a post about it and write out my thoughts on the new term used in psychology: medicalisation.

In James Davies new controversial book "Cracked: Why Psychiatry Is Doing More Harm Than Good", it explains that Medicalisation is the process by which more and more of our human characteristics are seen as needing medical explanation and treatment. In essence, it highlights the problem of psychiatry medicalising ordinary reactions and responses.

A prime example of this is the issue of Introversion featuring in the DSM. For those of you that don't know, Introversion is a personality type. Online dictionaries define it as "a person predominantly concerned with their own thoughts and feelings rather than with external things" or "to concentrate one's interests upon oneself".

Immediately however, this gives off a negative impression of introverts; suggesting that they have perhaps limited social ability, selfish priorities or closed mindedness. This is not the case. Malcolm Goldsmith and Martin Wharton distinguishes introverts from extroverts in a simple way. Introverts have a higher internal energy, therefore they seek less stimulation from external things whereas extroverts rely on external things to boost their internal energy. Whilst introverts will often view extroverts as being shallow, extroverts can perceive introverts to be withdrawn, and this - it seems - has escalated to an extent where introversion is now viewed as an abnormality, or as a recognised mental disorder.

Inevitably, the content of the DSM is liable to change and shift according to new research. For example, homosexuality used to be listed alongside disorders such as schizophrenia and bi-polar. But the fact that introversion has been included in the latest version; DSM-5 is very telling of the society we live in today.

Society is geared up for extroverts. There is no doubt about it. Social media is constantly badgering us to "connect" with people around us. On facebook now, you can boast of all the friends you have and where you met them; secondary school, 'high' school, university, your first job, the list is endless. Even the travel industry, boosting the appeal of "girls'" and lads'" holidays suggests that extroversion is the norm in contrast to the way introverted activities are shunned as being "nerdy" or "geeky".

So the question is, at what point does a personality type or characteristic become 'abnormal'? If society has made the majority of young people extroverts, then introverts are abnormal because they are the minority. But this definition cannot be generalised to other situations. If the number of religious people in Britain is smaller than the number of non-religious people, does that make religious people abnormal? Will we be seeing 'Christians' in the DSM in years to come?

Its a harrowing thought. It seems as though this need to label everything and put people into concrete categories is crushing any remaining individuality or culture that remains in society today.

I wonder if, eventually, the majority of people will fall into some sort of 'abnormal' category, that the very essence of being labelled as 'abnormal' will become the norm....