As an atheist, can I object to a diagnosis on religious grounds?

[sunnichka]

I've been increasingly ill for the past year and a half and I've travelled to a major medical center hoping to finally get a diagnosis. A neurologist has just diagnosed me with psychogenic seizures. "Psychogenic" means that there is no organic or physical cause for my symptoms, that instead my symptoms are arising purely from psychological causes.

Because the neurologist has decided that my symptoms are not physical, I will not be evaluated further except by a psychiatrist. This is a huge disappointment. I've been so sick over the last year and a half that I've had to take all incompletes in my classes (I'm a biochemistry student), and drop down to part-time status. I've even worried that I might have to apply for disability. I need real medical answers, or at the very least, an honest "We don't know what's wrong with you."

As an atheist, and more specifically, a "physicalist" who does not believe in mind-body dualism, can I send a letter to their ethics committee, objecting to this diagnosis on religious grounds?

What do you all think?

 

[Dancing David]

Psychology is physical, get a second opinion?
Stress is physical arousal.

 

[AdMan]

I'm not a doctor, but looking up "psychogenic disease" on Wikipedia, I see it says:

A psychogenic disease is a set of symptoms or complaints whose origin likely lies within the complex interactions of the frontal lobes of the brain and the system in which the complaint manifests.

In most cases, a structural or anatomical abnormality has not been identified, as seen in an organic disease, however this does not account for possible genetic, biochemical, electrophysiological or other abnormalities that may be present but for which we do not have the technology or background to identify. The traditional duality that divided mind from body is no longer accepted by the mainstream of science.

I read that as the disease is still a manifestation of something going on physically in the brain. It does not require mind-body dualism, or the concept of the soul.

So not sure your complaint would have merit, reading it that way.

I would also suggest getting additional opinions.

 

[ben m]

Because the neurologist has decided that my symptoms are not physical, I will not be evaluated further except by a psychiatrist. This is a huge disappointment.

Psychiatry is dealing with a physical illness of the physical brain. The difference is that a psychiatrist's method of diagnosis (and attack) involves sending signals through the offending neural net, whereas a neurologist's methods involve slicing up neurons or dosing them with chemicals.

The reason that's tough to deal with is that the "signals" layer is also what you think of as "yourself" (personality, consciousness, etc.) and therefore you're aware of, and consciously engaged with, the treatment, in a different way than you would if the treatment were a neurotransmitter in your bloodstream.

But psychiatric illness is real, honest brain illness. To be "disappointed" that the the treatment is psychiatric, rather than chemical, is sort of like getting kidney disease and being "disappointed" that the treatment is dietary rather than surgical. It totally makes sense ("I wanted to wake up from surgery and be cured") but ... well, the kidney, like the brain, does lots of different things, any of them can go wrong, and there are different ways in to different types of illness.

That said: nothing wrong with getting a second opinion.

 

[Merko]

There is a lot of resistance to psychiatric diagnoses because of stigma.

People tend to think 'they say I'm crazy'. But psychological disorders are real. They are also often treatable. I understand if you had rather been told that the cause was something more easily tangible. But it is what it is.

I would advise you to take the psychiatrists very seriously and not be ashamed because 'there is something wrong with your head'. By all means, get a second opinion. But don't dismiss their knowledge. They are trying to help you and your best chance to get well is to follow their advice.

 

[zenbuffy]

Can't you seek a second opinion, or has that avenue been exhausted? Surely there is more than one centre you can approach if you truly believe your problems to not be psychiatric in nature.

That said, there is no shame in a problem that is psychiatric. Many people have such problems and cope perfectly with them. I would advise you to at least consider that the diagnosis may be accurate, and that psychiatric help may enable you to be well again, and turn your life back around.

 

[Dancing David]

Sunnichka,

You should go see the psychiatrist, be honest answer the questions as best you can, you may find relief. If the medicines give you problems, talk to them to adjust the dosages and types.

 

[bozman]

If I were in your postion, I would see the psychiatrist. Even if your symptoms aren't physical in origin, the end result is no different from if they were. I say to swallow it and defer to the experts on this one.

 

[gnome]

It seems odd to me to object to a diagnosis on any grounds of personal belief. If you wish to dispute the diagnosis, evidence would be more valuable. I believe someone suggested a 2nd opinion if you're concerned.

 

[Beelzebuddy]

Since no one else mentioned it yet , I wanted to point out that psychosomatic conditions are not religious experiences. Even if the problem were all "in your head" (which it doesn't seem to be, except in the literal sense), that wouldn't mean it isn't real, and it wouldn't cast aspersions on your skepticism or materialism. Your material is behaving funny, that's all.