I believe i have Ant social personality disorder

VTheChaosTheoryV wrote:

fallinguphill wrote:Maybe it's the number of traits AND the severity of them that helps qualify the diagnosis?

For example:

A 12 year old kid is mean to animals (Kicking, throwing) and has a temper but isn't violent vs. A 12 year old kid who stabs animals, catches them on fire and is constantly getting into physical fights with others.

Both children share certain traits (Animal abuse, temper) but one is clearly more severe then the other.

It's the animal abuse and the fact that I was kinda abusive (The pumpkin to the head, the girl over the ledge, and the pencils to the arm) that really scare me... I've always read that animal abuse is NEVER nothing...?

.. but its certainty "something".
and how severe does it have to be in order to be qualified as a diagnoses? sure a kid who stabs animals and catches them on fire and whatever sure its severe, but there could be worse no? if so, then does that just say he has traits as well, and there severe but not qualified to be diagnosed? even with the other kid who just kicks them around, sure he has traits as well, but what if he has the potential to be just as violent and is over looked? always a possibility, but maybe thats the chance you take in diagnosing it.

as it has been explained to me-

a personality DISORDER interferes with one's productive engagement in one's society. in other words: it is disturbing or inhibiting to either the self, or those that interact with the self.

a personality TRAIT inclines a person toward a certain demeanor, and/or involves the satiation of certain unique proclivities, it does not, however, actively interfere with the aforementioned productive engagement in society.

a personality TRAIT makes you a unique little snowflake. a personality DISORDER makes you a ball of hail.

for those that do not get the analogy- snow is uniform... it fits in. hail does damage, and sometimes its' very velocity destroys it upon impact.

very, very subjective stuff. one doc may dx aspd, the very next may just be of the opinion that you are a cold hearted a$$hole. for one it's a serious flake- for the next, it's borderline. see what i mean?

i think when it comes to aspd (or psychopathy, or sociopathy, or whatever the hell the new name is this week) the "ocham's razor" if you will, is purely internal. do you suffer from the "guilt reflex?" do you have regrets? do you have the ability (or desire for that matter) to "empathize?" do you, in fact, give to flicks of a rabid coyote's tail about anything or anyone that does not directly impact you, or at least have the capacity to impact you in some way?

sure, one could gather the aggregate of available info about an individual's past in relationships, jobs, proclivities, liesure activities, et-cetera ad nauseam; and from that one could INFER a tendency toward aspd. however, there are those who are adept enough to maintain the "cover"... and those who may not have any sort of disorder other than (hopefully terminal) ignorance.

ah, the wily psychosocioantisocial-opath. a many coloured, and magnificently varied creature indeed. and here is the part where we all lament the failures of the mental health system in over-, under, and mis- diagnosing aspd (et-al). you see- the "good ones" (read that "anyone not currently incarcerated") don't contribute to the criteria. heads of state, corporate big-wigs, "highly successful" individuals in any walk of life or career field got where they are because they do not feel guilt. they are willing and able to do whatever it takes to whoever gets in their way in order to climb the ladder. the difference is one of intelligence and adroitness alone. the ignorant, drug abusing "hooby-doo" (my proposal for a new dx that will encompass all of the "-opaths") turns to petty theft, vandalism, or botched assaults and more- and due to their inability to fathom simple science and forensic technologies find themselves indicted, and then incarcerated. however, the educated, slightly-more-intelligent-than-a-piece-of-wood types go to the effort of planning ahead, covering their tracks- weighing out and planning for contingencies and emergencies... and they get away with it.

it's a simple thing, really. the intelligent fall only to arrogance. simple oversights and stupid shortcuts. it really is not that difficult to avoid "imperial entanglements"... and so the psy-docs turn to the captive audience, and take all of their criteria from those that have been successfully prosecuted by the victim society. ergo, the average IQ of a sociopath is low. the average impulsivity of a sociopath is high. self control? unheard of. in other words- it is only the absolute dumbest, impulsive, no-self-control, violent sado-dildoes that account for at least 90% of the data collected.

why? because hooby-doos will also lie like a rug to cover. until one is in an absolute corner (read that- jail) one will NOT admit to anything. period. correction- the intelligent hooby-doos will admit to various "foibles of youth" some "errors in judgement"... in other words, socially acceptable diversions. furthermore, they will have prepared a groundwork of "character witnesses" to testify to the upstanding nature and high general caliber of the individual in question, if it ever does, in fact, come down to a war of semantics and "he said, she said" mallarkey. in other words, more people will take the stand and tell you all that i am a fine, upstanding (albeit struggling) father of four than otherwise. i am 30 years old though, i have spent a majority of my adult life cultivating that reputation for just such a contingency. simply put- if you say i robbed you, i'll have ten people lined up to tell you how certain they are that i was just having a rough day, and fully intended to pay for the "borrowed" goods.

and when i sell it to you.... you'll believe me too.