There is a large camp of researchers and academics now claiming that Internet Addiction Disorder is more than just bad habit. These people believe that excessive computer use that interferes with daily life is a serious diagnosable disease. Consequently, this group of people is seeking to enlist the disease in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) , likening the "disorder" to gambling among other problems. Jerald Block, of the American Journal of Psychiatry, claims Internet Addiction Disorder is considered a serious public health problem, and the government estimates that 168,000 children may require medications. China estimates that teenage pathological computer users alone number 10 million or more. I respectfully disagree that this should be a clinically diagnosable disease.
While I certainly don't have any research readily handy to disprove such a disorder, I do believe that people who allow the Internet to disrupt their lives have not only bad habit, but immature social skills. Moreover, I believe that people are addicted to many aspects of the Internet (gambling, pornography, gaming) rather than the Internet itself. If academics and scholars do, in fact, succeed in officially publishing the disorder in DSM-IV it will become problematic in many ways. Particularly, insurance companies will be forced to burden the medical care required to tend to this "disorder". In a day when our country is moving to universal health care, this is an unfair burden for insurance companies to shoulder when they will begin to immediately lose money in the near future. Moreover, if the disease is so widespread, it may become superfluous to treat everyone with the disease.
Rather, people need to become more aware of time management and other social skills. If a fully matured adult cannot monitor the time that they spend online, then the parents didn't do a very good job raising their child or the person needs to be put into a mental institution. Perhaps a middle ground would work as well, having focus groups like Alcoholics Anonymous to bring a heightened sense of self-awareness to the problem. In any case, people should be able to control their usage of technology this day-in-age. Increases in technology will only be incremental from this moment forward and we can't diagnose half the country with a disorder.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I am not really sure how to attack this one. The idea of Internet Addiction Disorder seems hard to believe as an actual disease, yet, I think there may be some validity to the researchers argument. While, I am not sure that medication can or will cure such a disease, an addiction is an addiction and I don't think it's fair to pass judgment on someone else if we haven't ever walked in their shoes. I don't think the parent's are to blame in this situation at all. Our parents didn't grow up with the internet and for many parents, the only association they have with the internet is an email account. They know the basics. We know the shortcuts, AIM, ichat, itunes, web games, You Tube, Facebook, My Space, etc. There are so many things to explore on the internet nowadays that I can understand how someone could get lost for hours playing on their computer. Plus, many major television networks have episodes of their shows on their sites that you can watch for free, so that could take up a lot of time as well. I agree that many people are addicted to an aspect of the internet and maybe not everything, but we should still treat their problem as if they are addicted to everything. If someone is addicted to cocaine and has never used any other drugs, they don't go to Cocaine Anonymous. Instead, they go to Narcotics Anonymous. Everyone is grouped together. Just because you haven't tried it, doesn't mean you wouldn't be tempted to if you were offered it. Just like the internet, television can be equally addicting. You can waste away your day and not even realize it because you're so engrossed in whatever tv show or movie you're watching. I agree that if people learned to manage their time better there would probably be less people addicted to the internet. However, to each is own. We can't monitor every computer and person that uses them. We can't tell someone who watches 10 hours of television a day and makes straight A's in school that they need to manage their time better and watch less television because clearly watching television for them is not preventing them from excelling in other areas of their life. The first step is to figure out whether this is actually a disease. I think a support group is a great idea and possibly therapy might put things into perspective for someone who is addicted to the internet, gambling, or television. I think parents can monitor what their children are using (technology wise) by not allowing them to have a television in their bedroom or placing certain restrictions on the internet so they can't enter certain websites and can only spend a certain amount of time on the internet per day. I totally agree that tax-payers should not be responsible for paying medical expenses for an addiction that can be cured without medicine most likely. It will be interesting to see how everything pans out.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Penn that this idea of internet addiction as “disease” is a little unreasonable. This is certainly not to say that I don’t believe it is a problem, an obviously a serious one for some (considering the cases provided in class). I don’t disregard the poignant repercussions of those situations that have supported the notion, but rather I find these situations as isolated incidents that are not frequent enough in occurrence to use as a generalization to the entire population. Regarding the political side of the issue that Penn points out, I agree that by being so quick to say it is a disease requiring clinical treatment could cause increased concerns with regards to health care. It is already difficult to get insurance companies to support some legitimate instances of substance abuse or disease related problems. If the country now has to worry about vying for support to clinically treat these instances of internet related “disease”, how are we to further support for ameliorating the already present issues with insurance companies that are very real, very important, and very pertinent to a considerable portion of the actual population? I realize this is very much a policy-driven argument. There is much more to it. There are in fact people that do suffer from spending too much time on the internet. I feel like these situations need to be better evaluated first, though, before saying that the issue lies solely in the addictive nature of the internet. Like Mandy pointed out, much of this time can be spent watching t.v. shows on the internet. In this case, there is a blur between being addicted to the internet/being addicted to television? Or, as Penn pointed out…is it an issue of social inadequacy that could be attributed possibly to poor parental supervision or other confounding factors? While there is certainly research present to suggest that there is a problem here, I think a lot more needs to be taken into consideration before saying that internet addiction could be a disease.
ReplyDeleteI think Penn made some really interesting points. It is hard to think about Internet addiction as a diagnosable disease, especially when individuals are addicted to specific aspects from gaming to gambling to porn to social networking to shopping. It seems like individuals who are addicted to online habits might be prone to being addicted to similar behaviors in real life, but the Internet, of course, makes things easier. Because the Internet is accessible from home 24-hours a day in our country, people who would have otherwise maybe avoided a full-blown shopping addiction, are unable to do so. As much as I agree that classifying Internet addiction as a disease will further burden the healthcare system, I do feel that providing assistance and support to those who suffer from Internet addiction is something our society must do. If individuals feel they need therapy and want to recover from what they feel is an addiction to the Internet, therapy and counseling should be available. I think support groups and group therapy seems like a wonderful way to combat the problem of Internet addiction in our society. If individuals really feel that they are having more serious problems, they can go to a personal therapist or enter a rehab facility voluntarily as some self-proclaimed Internet addicts have done in the past, like we talked about in class.
ReplyDeleteIf there is one thing I can agree on, like most everyone else has said, it is that having Internet Addiction Disorder being enlisted as an actual diagnosable disease is a very controversial move and that a plethora of problems can and will result if it is finalized. I will also agree that perhaps it is what is being seen or done on the internet that is causing the addiction rather than just being on the internet itself.
ReplyDeleteI am actually in a class that talks about mental ilness and society and if there is one thing that is difficult about mental disorders, is that it is not easy to make clear definitions for individuals when diagnosing; just because a person is short one criterion of having a disorder does not make them less in danger of someone else who does have one more criterion.
I do believe that people nowadays are spending more time online and neglecting their "reality" at times. I do not deny that some people are in a worse state than others when it comes to being "addicted" to the internet. However, the same can probably be said for those that may have television addiction. Now that the internet is the new technology, it is replacing television as a medium of addiction. Playing devil's advocate here, could we not see that perhaps the millions of people who are so-called "addicted" to the internet are just adapting to the technological influences on our reality brought by the internet? We have become dependent on the internet as a source of information and communication that it is no longer seen as a luxury, but a necessity in society. Perhaps with more years to come, it may be possible the numbers of people who would qualify as addicted internet users would increase. If this be the case, I would begin to think that it has nothing to do with individuals being irresponsible or lacking self-control; perhaps instead of seeing internet addiction from the obvious point of view that individuals are sucking their lives into the net, we should perhaps see it as another step for human society to adapt to technological advances.
Also, I think that many people who are not "addicted" to the internet, television, or other forms of media, etc. are not much better or more in control when it comes to the sense of living responsible lives or being more socially mature. We could possibly turn the argument around and say that people who always go out and party excessively are galavanting addicts... but of course that would be seen as silly. Yet, i am sure you can find plenty of people who may spend the same amount of time as internet addicts doing things that seem futile and irresponsible, but we're not telling them to go seek rehab.
The problem with seeing relying on the internet as a way that society is adapting to new technology is that some people use technology in a way that advances their lives and careers, while others use technology in a way that takes over their lives. I don't agree with classifying internet addiction disorder as a mental disease, but like Penn, that may be based on insurance issues.
ReplyDeleteWhen people start spending their entire days on the internet, we have to start looking at the motivation behind it. If people are still able to function normally, then it doesn't become an issue. The more difficult area is where people can't function normally and whose responsibility it is to step in.
I agree with most of the comments, disagreeing with the fact that internet addiction is an actual "disease." I feel that this comes to show nowadays we tend to over prescribe medications and over diagnose diseases. For instance, ADD is a perfect example of this happening. I feel that doing anything, whether it involves the internet or any other hobby or activity once it interferes with your life too much because you have placed too much dependence on it then it becomes an issue. However, I still do not feel that this is an actual disease. I think this comes to show that anything someone dedicates too much of their life to it and does not do it in moderation it can have harmful repercussions to them and/or their life as a whole.
ReplyDeleteI disagree that internet addiction is a disease as well but believe that it is termed that way by those who are quick to assign a medical condition to any disorder. I feel, like Stewi above, that this is similar to a hyperactive disorder or attention deficit disorder which is commonly only an excuse for young children not being properly disciplined. It is much easier to just go ahead and say "I have a disease," than to actually work to counter against it. People should work to return to social interaction and good conversation rather than hiding behind a screen all day and wasting time with mindless games and surfing. While some of this can be healthy and a relaxation tactic-too much is a real detriment to life.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with Stewi Downer. Although it may be problematic to become too dependent on certain technologies such as the internet and different aspects of the internet, it is not a disease. Problems with this are also inevitable, however. The more technologies conduct the daily tasks in our lives, the more likely a person is to start depending on them. Just because someone spends a lot of time doing something, that does not make them addicted to it. Even if it is useless and they should prefer spending their time in a social situation rather than YouTube, that is their choice no matter how bad of a decision it is.
ReplyDeleteI agree that taking internet disorders to be clinically treated is a bit of a stretch. People are addicted to much worse things, but you don't see clinics being opened all over the country. I think issues like smoking, obesity etc. are much more of an issue that needs to be dealt with then the internet.
ReplyDeleteLike I mentioned in another post about addictions I think the internet is vital in todays society so people are more dependent on it not because they are addicted to get on, but because they need it to get work done and get through their day. Yes its bad that we may be dependent on it, but society has made us like that because so many things that we need to access to communicate, get work done, learn are on the internet.
I also agree that labeling internet addiction as a disease is a huge mistake due to the possible consequences. Not only are there too many gray areas concerning the topic but insurance companies are already overwhelmed. I think Katelyn raises a great point regarding addiction to smoking and obsessive, emotional eating problems. These two issues must be addressed before internet addiction takes up time and resources. Also, many posts above regard the use of the internet as a tool. The internet itself is not the addicting factor- the activities carried out on the internet can be addicting. Like Emily mentions, if someone is addicted to shopping they are now able to do so on an unlimited basis. Likewise, problems with gambling and gaming can exist through other mediums as well, given the desires of the individual user. If a person is addicted to gaming they can certainly fulfill this desire without the internet. At this point in time, I do not believe resources, money, insurance labeling, etc should be spent on internet addiction; however, there is much to learn about the issue. Internet addiction clinics and studies could be done at the university level or through grant based programs to further investigate the issue before labeling internet addiction as a disorder.
ReplyDeleteOn my last post to Katelyn's post, I was talking about how I do believe that Internet disorder can be a psychological problem; but that it is due to already present addictive susceptibilities or psychological problems. Penn brings up a good point that there may not be Internet addictions, but addictions to various aspects of the internet; such as porn or web games. I think this is a valid observation, but I still believe that these are just the symptoms or results of deeper psychological issues.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with Jerald Black that children should be prescribed medicine for internet addition. Many believe that kids today are already over prescribed medications, especially in the case of ADD, as Stewi already pointed out. My mom always brings this up this, so I am familiar with the argument. Several kids in my brother's first grade class have been diagnosed. In regard to internet disorder, it makes you wonder what medications doctors would prescribe to keep a person away from gaming and social networking cites? Learning to implement self control is the solution. Responsible adults, especially, should be able to have the control to leave a game of WOW to go to work and make a living. Some people have addictive personalities and need to learn to control this. I agree with what Braxton said about how our society is quick to diagnose a medical disorder for anything these days, which is sad.
ReplyDeleteI think it is too broad to say that internet addiction means a person has immature social skills which you mentioned in your post. However,I do think that internet communication is leading our society to have poor social skills because it is possible to avoid traditional face to face contact.
True internet addiction is likely a sign of a deeper psychological disorder as Mollie also said.