This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 9 |
Just after she died I read one of her last interviews for Q magazine whereby she spoke about days when she felt down and lethargic. She mentioned the days where she felt hyper and excitable. She said that her mum, who was a Pharmacist, thought that she could be bipolar but Amy didn't think she was. I don't think that she was bipolar but after watching the tributes to her and what her friends said about her it does seem that she could have had BPD. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spyingcactus ( talk • contribs)
I don't know where the screenwriters deliberately intended for this but as a character Janine from EastEnders does fit a classic case for BPD. Last year the actress who plays her said that Janine and (bipolar sufferer) Stacey Branning are similar. BPD and Bipolar are similar. I think Janine even fits the profile of a real life BPD sufferer. Janine has had to deal with loneliness just like many BPD's would and this has led to her feeling bitter and disconnected from the world around her. Like the real life BPD you have to very careful around Janine because she's very smart, cunning and sometimes dangerous when pushed too far.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Spyingcactus ( talk • contribs)
I myself suffer from this disorder and "know" for a fact that therapy is honestly the only way to overcome this horrible burden. It's not a chemical problem, it's all about not regulating your emotions or developing any sort of coping mechanism to deal with your emotions. Yes mood stabilizer's can help but cannot be used as a main form of treatment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.242.114.10 ( talk) 07:34, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
This page is going to be undergoing some editing as a part of the Wikipedia Initiative. You can do whatever you want to it by Thursday. I just need to make the changes so I can finish being graded on this project. Please give me a chance to get this done. Thank you for understanding. Orca3214 ( talk) 03:43, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
DIAGNOSIS I started the reorganization of the BPD page and took out sections that will go into other parts to help the article make more sense/flow better. PLEASE bear with me. If you can help me make it better in any way, go ahead, just don't delete everything I have done. I am new at this and once I am done I will never do this again. If something needs to be fixed I welcome any help, like I said I haven't done anything like this before. Orca3214 ( talk) 04:57, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
Also the user in question would do well to read WP:MEDMOS and WP:MEDRS as they will need to be followed for his changes to stick. BTW this "I am new at this and once I am done I will never do this again." does not make it sound like you are that engaged... Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 05:50, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
Moonriddengirl gives a clear and concise outline of our copyright obligations here. -- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 12:29, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
What's up with the referencing, 3 different sections with 2 different numbering systems inline? Eversync ( talk) 02:55, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Physicians, I believe, need to treat symptoms not a disease. The stigma is so damaging. There is no way to get a long-time career, no matter how well one can excel in their field for any length of time. The "help" by Physicians, NIH, and so on, sum up a diagnosis within a 15 minute period and a barrage of tests that are only as good as thew person who made the test. Many of the Physicians are not from this country and do not diagnose correctly. I was diagnosed from NIH first with this, ten next to DID and when I went to an Ivy League Graduate school, it was concluded that it was Culture Shock. I can never work in my field because of these incorrect diagnosis. Physicians form other parts of the world have not traveled all over this country so they do not understand, for example, what it is like to work in the Deep South to Southern California, to the North East, let alone Georgetown. They also have false ideas about what professions one may have. I, for example , have never had Breast Implants so in these Doctors eyes I could never work in the High Class Establishments, under different names, ion different cities to keep my son and myself from getting a life-long stigma. It is required that you have a Stage Name. You absolutely lead two separate lives due to safety reasons for yourself and your entire family. If it was safe you would not need a Stage Name, you could use you your own. I have been stalked on numerous occasions and was told by the Police and the Club staff that I could not leave until everyone was sure it was safe for me to pick up my son from the babysitters and then drive home. This unfair treatment and repeated diagnosis from Doctors is so unfair that I refuse to be treated than no-one except a Resident. It is an extremely unsafe profession and just because I have different Stage Names in different parts of the Country does not mean I have DID or Borderline Personality Disorder. Let them trade places with me for a week then I will have the expertise to give them the life long stigma. Liquid money, glamour, and freedom to schedule your "other life" around this one is the drive to stay in this industry. Preconceived notions and blanket statements ruin it for everyone. It gives all of us a bad name, family and friends included. The Police are more knowledgeable about this than any Doctor. They are out their with us protecting us for good reason. In some cities they have to wear Riot Gear. Where is the safety for us? Please stop with these incorrect diagnosis and blanket statements. It ruins everyone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.186.191.76 ( talk) 08:03, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm going to start editing this page. I'm wanting to practice editing, and I've noticed room for improvement in this article. I also know something about BPD from professional experience. Since this is my first attempt at editing an article, I'm going to go slowly and I'm going to be seeking feedback. I'll comment on my edits in this section. Thanks for your help. William Fleeson ( talk) 01:49, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
I removed the sentence about family members' expressed emotion, because it was ambiguous in meaning (it appeared to suggest that the effect of BPD on family members was beneficial), because it was not about signs and symptoms of BPD but rather about the effect of family members' behavior on the course of BPD, and because the citation was a single primary source from 1999. William Fleeson ( talk) 02:10, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
I removed the following sentence "Individuals with BPD often enact multiple low-lethality suicide attempts triggered by seemingly minor incidents, and less commonly enact high-lethality attempts that are attributed to impulsiveness or comorbid bipolar disorder or major depressive disorder, with interpersonal stressors appearing to be particularly common triggers. [1]". I did so for a few reasons. First, it was a very close paraphrasing of the abstract of the cited article. Second, it gave the impression that suicide attempts among those with BPD are not very dangerous or threatening -- the cited article was in fact trying to counteract such an impression. Third, the rest of the paragraph covers the issue of suicidality as a sign or symptom quite thoroughly and with less POV. (Incidentally, I accidentally hit save page before I commented on the edit in the edit box -- I tried to fix that error, but could not find an edit button to do so. Still learning. Please accept my apologies.) William Fleeson ( talk) 02:02, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
There is a banner at the top of this page that says this article was once listed as a good article, and no longer is. It continues "Borderline personality disorder was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated." However, I don't see any suggestions. If there are such suggestions, please direct me to them. If there are not such suggestions, at what point should this article be renominated? I'm not saying it should be nominated now, I'm just wondering whether there are specific criteria or suggestions for this article beyond those in the general criteria for good articles. William Fleeson ( talk) 17:31, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
There appears to be many professionals who believe that Joan Crawford, as depicted in Mommie Dearest (film), has BPD. I found two citations from Google books within a few clicks. Bearian ( talk) 20:07, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
I think it's interesting that there are people talking about they're BPD diagnosis. Can we write something on the subject instead of just creating a list? Also, do the 2 books about Joan Crawford contain anything other than speculation? Do they include people who've interview her as sources? Reub2000 ( talk) 19:28, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Evidence suggests that individuals with BPD, while being high in intimacy- or novelty-seeking, can be hyper-alert
I can't make head or tail of this sentence as viable ensemble or contrast, and the source is paywalled. — MaxEnt 19:41, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
The article should explain the motive of a typical BPD person when she tells her partner that he is wonderful, that she loves him and that she couldn't survive without him. Minutes later, she shouts and him, telling him she hates him and that he is a worthless piece of shit. Do her feelings vacillate so rapidly and severely that she genuinely viscerally hates the same person that she loved only minutes earlier and that she cannot control her feelings or behaviour? Alternatively, is it a form of psychological warfare that she is deploying; if so, for what purpose? BPD people hate being or feeling abandoned, so why do they drive their partners away by often viciously insulting them and / or physically attacking them? It is obvious that if you want someone to love you and care about you, don't verbally or physically attack him. Why is it that BPD people frequently do what is severely detrimental to themselves as well as to those around them? 188.29.146.125 ( talk) 12:31, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
I typed an address for the site of a friend who is a musician. That address directed me to the Borderline Personality Disorders page on Wikipedia. I am wondering if this is someone's idea of a sick joke. Matildatwerp ( talk) 21:39, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
I'm wondering why Venlafaxine isnt mentioned in the meds section? Its a newer antidepresant with good results in depression with anxiety comorbid, which the article states (in other sections ) is quite common in BPD people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.33.34.79 ( talk) 09:48, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
The following needs clarity, IMO:
"Some mental health professionals (and the DSM-IV[13]) describe individuals with BPD as deliberately manipulative or difficult, but analysis and findings generally trace behaviors to inner pain and turmoil, powerlessness and defensive reactions, or limited coping and communication skills.[14][15][n 4] There has been limited research on family members' understanding of borderline personality disorder and the extent of burden or negative emotion experienced or expressed by family members.[16] Parents of individuals with BPD may show co-existing extremes of over-involvement and under-involvement."
The first sentence is disjointed. First, what "behaviors?" It seems to be about manipulation, but one of the sources is about self-mutilation. Second, the DSM is more than "some" mental health professionals, at least in the U.S. If we're acknowledging that the "Bible of psychiatry" views manipulation as a characteristic of BPD, we shouldn't dismiss what we've just said in the same sentence. Otherwise, why bring it up at all? I argue for a simple statement that many BPDs display manipulative behavior (or are judged by the medical community to do so). Period. There are a number of sources that treat manipulation as a common symptom of BPD, including this 2007 study in the American Journal of Psychiatry: http://psychiatryonline.org/article.aspx?articleid=98510. If we want to explain the psychological sources of this behavior and note that "manipulation" can be a prejudicial concept, we can do so in a separate sentence using the citation we already have.
The second and third sentences here make no sense. The source for the second sentence says family members can suffer emotional difficulties of their own based on how much information they receive about BPD. The source for the third sentence says the involvement of family members in the lives of BPD sufferers may play some role in their destructive behaviors. At least based on the abstracts, neither source says anything about manipulation. Yet taken together, given their place in this paragraph, and given their poor construction, these sentences read as though they're blaming family members for the manipulative characteristic of BPD. These sentences belong elsewhere and need a rewrite.
I don't feel comfortable editing myself, as I get the impression this article has been the source of major contention. I mean no value judgment about BPD myself. It looks like this page has been scoured clean. Ctnelsen ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:58, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
I was referred to this page by a therapist on line after I talked to him about one of my close ones who has some sort of mental disorder that resembles BPD. But some of the simptoms mentined consistantly in this article are not present in this person. Like oscilating in idealizing a person and then devaluing the same person, or trying to harm oneself etc..but the other simptoms mentioned for BPD are prasent. Should this person be classified as having BPD or is he having a different type of disorder. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.194.80.234 ( talk) 13:51, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi all! I've added how BPD can affect reliability as a witness (under Controversies) and specified which brain abnormalities accompany the disorder. Should I remove these from the To-do list? Firecatalta ( talk) 07:13, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Great job! Feel free to remove it from the list. Lova Falk talk 07:47, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Earlier today an IP removed the section on Chinese psychiatry, and another editor reinstated it. Actually, looking at the info, the removal is correct (even if the original motivation wasn't). First, the section used a primary source for the information, which is always worrisome. More importantly, inclusion here was pure original research, and thus forbidden. Unless we can find a reference that explicitly says, "This disorder in China is the same as BPD", we cannot include it here. That is, we cannot look at the description of the Chinese disorder and say, "Hey, that's the same!" Doing so is an act of interpretation, and thus not allowed. Qwyrxian ( talk) 11:37, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
On the to do list it says: Add details about pre-adolescent diagnosis. I wonder if whoever put this on the to-do list really had enough knowledge of BPD. As the article correctly says: "... clinicians are discouraged from diagnosing anyone before the age of 18, due to adolescence and a still-developing personality." Some of the criteria for BDP are not uncommon and not pathological in children and adolescents. So I wonder if this really should be on the to-do list. Lova Falk talk 08:28, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi everyone!
I was looking at the Notable persons sections today after Jim Michael’s addition of Nicola Edgington, and I realized that I hadn’t checked the source for Mamoru Takuma yet. When I followed the source, the diagnosis of emotionally unstable personality disorder is only listed in the section copied below, in the paragraph at the bottom. This website’s links for this section of information all go to “Page not found” notices, and there are no other sources for this information listed on the page. I checked on Takuma’s Wikipedia page, and the information is backed up with the same unsourced website. Unless someone can find where the site sources their info for Takuma’s BPD diagnosis, the website does not meet Wikipedia guidelines for reliable sources – it is self-published (see the description in the upper right hand corner of its page), has no editorial oversight, and does not cite the info in it that is relevant to our article. Mamoru Takuma should be removed from the Notable persons with comorbid diagnoses section until a reliable source can be found. If anyone finds a reliable source, feel free to put him back in! Firecatalta ( talk) 19:26, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
午前08時頃 起床 午前09時30分 アパートの賃貸人にも復しゅうしようと考え、マンションを出る前に火を付けたたばこを布団の上に置く。午前9時30分過ぎに部屋をでる。火は自然に消えた。 午前09時40分 猛スピードで発進する車が住民の取り付けたビデオに録画 京都新聞 午前10時頃 池田市槻木町7-15秋田刃物店で7480円の出刃包丁を購入 時事通信 午前10時10分 大阪教育大附属池田小学校、自動車通用門に到着 12分頃? 体育館東側付近にて2年南組担任の教諭と遭遇する。教諭は宅間を父兄と勘違いして会釈する。宅間、そのまま校舎へと進む。 午前10時13分 南校舎に近づき1階の2年南組教室の窓越しに5名の児童を発見する。5名の児童は偶然、教室に残っていた子供たちだった。 同教室テラス側出入り口より襲撃、5人全員を刺殺 午前10時15分 宅間はテラスに出て、東に隣接する2年西組の教室を襲撃。 午前10時18分 学校より110番通報 午前10時20分 児童が逃げ込んだスーパーより119番通報 午前10時24分 学校より119番通報 午前10時25分 河上洋介教諭、矢野克巳副校長が宅間守を取り押さえる 犯行時の被告の精神状態 被告は、かねてから妄想性人格障害、非社会性人格障害及び情緒不安定性人格障害(衝動型)などの精神状態を示し、社会に適応することができず、社会や個人との摩擦が絶えなかったが、犯行時及び前後を通じ、責任能力に影響を及ぼすような精神障害には何らかかっていなかった。
p.s. having trouble linking; still figuring out how! So, here is the Wiki article for identifying reliable sources, for those who want to have a look: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources#Questionable_sources Firecatalta ( talk) 19:26, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Unfortunately, DSM has forbidden us to cite their diagnosis criteria. I had heard about it, but was not sure, so I asked at Wikipedia talk:Copyright violations, and well, it's true. So I blanked the section. As far as I understand from the discussion, the criteria can neither be copied, nor can they be paraphrased closely. Lova Falk talk 06:04, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Have any notable non-Americans ever been diagnosed with borderline personality disorder? As a non-American, none of the people listed now are notable to me anyway. HiLo48 ( talk) 23:29, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
Adolf Hitler is often cited as being a BPD. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.150.95.237 ( talk • contribs) 14:24, 6 December 2012
Okay, I didn´t knew about this. Thanks for letting me know. 188.179.184.76 ( talk) 07:53, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
The info below is mostly correct, except for the time frame on mood swings in BPD, which is really minutes - days, not weeks; I already took off the ridiculous duration of "months" in one of my previous edits. However, not a word is present in the source provided, unless I'm missing something. The info would be useful, so ultimately I would like us to keep it, but first we need to find a source that actually provides it. And I would like to clean up the wording, too; this is not the clearest explanation I've ever seen. I'll keep an eye out for more sources, hopefully the info will be in one of the sources already provided for this section, and let me know if you guys find anything! Also, the source does give a nice overview of treatment options (from a behavioral perspective) for BPD and diagnostic methods, so that might be nice to incorporate into the relevant sections at some point.
Removed info: Symptoms known as " mood swings" are common in both BPD and bipolar disorders. In borderline personality disorder, the term refers to marked intensity and variability of mood citation needed, typically in response to external psychosocial and intrapsychic stressors. Changes in mood, and changes in intensity, may occur abruptly and last for minutes, hours, days, or weeks. [2]
Here's a link to the source for those who are interested:
http://65.122.17.152/BAT%20Journal/VOL-10/BAT%2010-1.pdf#page=13
Firecatalta (
talk) 04:39, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
The study by Grant et al. (2008) was cited as finding significant differences in prevalence rates between sexes. In the actual article's abstract, and in its results section, the authors note that they found no statistically significant differences between men and women on prevalence rates. I corrected the error. Calitheic ( talk) 16:47, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
And now... for something more cheerful. What do you others think about nominating DPB as a good article? Lova Falk talk 10:06, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
It seems we agree on "Adverse childhood experiences". The second part of your comment opens up a whole new line of thinking, because according to attachment theory, an important function of the caretaker is to regulate the infant's emotions. (The infant is upset, cries, gets comforted by a parent and the infant calms down - a emotional regulation that eventually can be internalized.) So maybe the intense emotions and problems to process them (in some cases??) can be traced back (caused by??) caretakers' inadequate response to their infant. But right now I am just thinking aloud - you are the one with the good sources. I don't know if there are any good sources, and I actually doubt that it is a generally accepted view (even though I personally think it makes good sense). Lova Falk talk 20:26, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi guys!
So today someone edited the Notable people section to include the following:
Lauren Collier/Martin/Ruth, 27 year old female from Lancaster, PA. Serial dater and master seductress. Used sex and conversations of future relationship/marriage/family, with multiple men to get money and sense of security. Was extremely scared of abandonment, she will seek out multiple partners. She was a chronic liar who created false stories to gather sympathy of family and friends. Married a new partner two months after a divorce was final, while dating three men at the same time. She also lied about being pregnant to obtain money from the men. [3] [4]
And it got me thinking about the pros & cons of the Notable people section. On the one hand, I think it's interesting and informative, and helps point out prominent people who live with BPD. I think that can help reduce stigma, and for those who are in the Notable people section for criminal activity, it can help raise awareness about the severity of the disorder (though most are in the comorbid diagnosis section). On the other hand, I think there is a tendency to put in sensationalized criminals, such as Jeffrey Dahmer, and a tendency to make claims about people in the format quoted above, which could be stigmatizing to people who live with BPD. So I'm wondering what you all think about this section: is it a useful and necessary section for a medical/psychiatric/psychology article? Does it have potential to stigmatize or gloss over this illness, by highlighting people who are either criminals or football players? Are there changes we could make that could incorporate the information about notable people while still addressing these issues? I'd love to hear your thoughts. Firecatalta ( talk) 00:36, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
I am frankly tired of people deleting the reference to the SF novel Komarr, and its character Tien Vorsoisson, because they think that it is merely fannish speculation that Vorsoisson has BPD. Yes, the reference is to a mailing list archive, a mailing list of the author's fans. But the specific message cited was written by the author herself, participating on that mailing list, as shown in that message. For God's sake, before one claims that a reference isn't adequate to substantiate its referent, one should read it. BunsenH ( talk) 04:26, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
I propose a removal of the subsection notable people with BPD, and the one with comorbid diagnoses. They are trivia sections that don't contribute to our understanding of BPD. Lova Falk talk 19:47, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
My name is Jamie. I am a 32 year old female. I have recently been diagnosed with BPD. I am very discouraged and overwhelmed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.41.94.211 ( talk) 21:35, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello all,
The journal "Innovations in Clinical Neuroscience" (ICN) has been used for one of the sources in this article. For those who are not aware, the internet age has birthed a new phenomenon of what are known as predatory journals, which are journals that attempt to masquerade as a legitimate, peer-reviewed journal. These journals typically involve various forms of deceit (such as inventing fake professors to chair their editorial boards) and solicit or produce articles solely for profit. Their articles typically do not meet basic academic standards.
"Innovations in Clinical Neuroscience," a source recently used to back up information for the BPD article, is one such journal. The first and most significant warning sign is that this journal's main editor is a person who does not exist, or who if he does exist does not hold the position that the journal claims he holds. The journal claims that "Amir H. Kalali" holds a professorial position in the department of Psychiatry at the University of California, San Diego, but looking at the list of professors at UC San Diego demonstrates that "Kalali" does not hold any position there.
The journal's next editor, "Ahmed Aboraya," supposedly holds a professorial position at the West Virginia School of Osteopathic Medicine. He does not. I could continue with the rest of the editors on this "editorial board," but fabricating even 2 members of their editorial board is ridiculous enough as is.
Journals that involve deceit of this and other kinds are not considered reliable sources by the scientific community. As such, we should not be using any articles by ICN as sources for this or any other wikipedia article. Please spread awareness of this phenomenon in any setting that you deem appropriate, and I will be removing all information based on ICN sources from the BPD article momentarily.
For more information on how to identify a predatory journal, see the following: http://scholarlyoa.com/2012/11/30/criteria-for-determining-predatory-open-access-publishers-2nd-edition/
Best, Firecatalta ( talk) 21:15, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
the classification 301.83 refers to the DSM and not to the ICD as shown on the right side in the begining — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.94.95.111 ( talk) 07:19, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi all,
We've spoken previously about nominating this article for good article status, and I think we're ready! My last question is, do we know if the same issues about copyright apply to the posting of DSM 5 criteria as they did to the DSM-IV criteria? If so, we'll want to edit those out prior to applying for GAS. Great job everyone!
Firecatalta ( talk) 02:47, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
Restored "indiscriminate" to the text from an earlier edit. It differentiates between indiscriminate sex and orgy sex. Indiscriminate sex can imply sex either with individuals or with groups. The original text used "Promiscuous", but this is a loaded word that carries with it an implied judgment as to the nature of the behavior. "Indiscriminate", however, is a neutral word. -- Corjay ( talk) 03:32, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 9 |
Just after she died I read one of her last interviews for Q magazine whereby she spoke about days when she felt down and lethargic. She mentioned the days where she felt hyper and excitable. She said that her mum, who was a Pharmacist, thought that she could be bipolar but Amy didn't think she was. I don't think that she was bipolar but after watching the tributes to her and what her friends said about her it does seem that she could have had BPD. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spyingcactus ( talk • contribs)
I don't know where the screenwriters deliberately intended for this but as a character Janine from EastEnders does fit a classic case for BPD. Last year the actress who plays her said that Janine and (bipolar sufferer) Stacey Branning are similar. BPD and Bipolar are similar. I think Janine even fits the profile of a real life BPD sufferer. Janine has had to deal with loneliness just like many BPD's would and this has led to her feeling bitter and disconnected from the world around her. Like the real life BPD you have to very careful around Janine because she's very smart, cunning and sometimes dangerous when pushed too far.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Spyingcactus ( talk • contribs)
I myself suffer from this disorder and "know" for a fact that therapy is honestly the only way to overcome this horrible burden. It's not a chemical problem, it's all about not regulating your emotions or developing any sort of coping mechanism to deal with your emotions. Yes mood stabilizer's can help but cannot be used as a main form of treatment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.242.114.10 ( talk) 07:34, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
This page is going to be undergoing some editing as a part of the Wikipedia Initiative. You can do whatever you want to it by Thursday. I just need to make the changes so I can finish being graded on this project. Please give me a chance to get this done. Thank you for understanding. Orca3214 ( talk) 03:43, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
DIAGNOSIS I started the reorganization of the BPD page and took out sections that will go into other parts to help the article make more sense/flow better. PLEASE bear with me. If you can help me make it better in any way, go ahead, just don't delete everything I have done. I am new at this and once I am done I will never do this again. If something needs to be fixed I welcome any help, like I said I haven't done anything like this before. Orca3214 ( talk) 04:57, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
Also the user in question would do well to read WP:MEDMOS and WP:MEDRS as they will need to be followed for his changes to stick. BTW this "I am new at this and once I am done I will never do this again." does not make it sound like you are that engaged... Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 05:50, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
Moonriddengirl gives a clear and concise outline of our copyright obligations here. -- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 12:29, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
What's up with the referencing, 3 different sections with 2 different numbering systems inline? Eversync ( talk) 02:55, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Physicians, I believe, need to treat symptoms not a disease. The stigma is so damaging. There is no way to get a long-time career, no matter how well one can excel in their field for any length of time. The "help" by Physicians, NIH, and so on, sum up a diagnosis within a 15 minute period and a barrage of tests that are only as good as thew person who made the test. Many of the Physicians are not from this country and do not diagnose correctly. I was diagnosed from NIH first with this, ten next to DID and when I went to an Ivy League Graduate school, it was concluded that it was Culture Shock. I can never work in my field because of these incorrect diagnosis. Physicians form other parts of the world have not traveled all over this country so they do not understand, for example, what it is like to work in the Deep South to Southern California, to the North East, let alone Georgetown. They also have false ideas about what professions one may have. I, for example , have never had Breast Implants so in these Doctors eyes I could never work in the High Class Establishments, under different names, ion different cities to keep my son and myself from getting a life-long stigma. It is required that you have a Stage Name. You absolutely lead two separate lives due to safety reasons for yourself and your entire family. If it was safe you would not need a Stage Name, you could use you your own. I have been stalked on numerous occasions and was told by the Police and the Club staff that I could not leave until everyone was sure it was safe for me to pick up my son from the babysitters and then drive home. This unfair treatment and repeated diagnosis from Doctors is so unfair that I refuse to be treated than no-one except a Resident. It is an extremely unsafe profession and just because I have different Stage Names in different parts of the Country does not mean I have DID or Borderline Personality Disorder. Let them trade places with me for a week then I will have the expertise to give them the life long stigma. Liquid money, glamour, and freedom to schedule your "other life" around this one is the drive to stay in this industry. Preconceived notions and blanket statements ruin it for everyone. It gives all of us a bad name, family and friends included. The Police are more knowledgeable about this than any Doctor. They are out their with us protecting us for good reason. In some cities they have to wear Riot Gear. Where is the safety for us? Please stop with these incorrect diagnosis and blanket statements. It ruins everyone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.186.191.76 ( talk) 08:03, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm going to start editing this page. I'm wanting to practice editing, and I've noticed room for improvement in this article. I also know something about BPD from professional experience. Since this is my first attempt at editing an article, I'm going to go slowly and I'm going to be seeking feedback. I'll comment on my edits in this section. Thanks for your help. William Fleeson ( talk) 01:49, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
I removed the sentence about family members' expressed emotion, because it was ambiguous in meaning (it appeared to suggest that the effect of BPD on family members was beneficial), because it was not about signs and symptoms of BPD but rather about the effect of family members' behavior on the course of BPD, and because the citation was a single primary source from 1999. William Fleeson ( talk) 02:10, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
I removed the following sentence "Individuals with BPD often enact multiple low-lethality suicide attempts triggered by seemingly minor incidents, and less commonly enact high-lethality attempts that are attributed to impulsiveness or comorbid bipolar disorder or major depressive disorder, with interpersonal stressors appearing to be particularly common triggers. [1]". I did so for a few reasons. First, it was a very close paraphrasing of the abstract of the cited article. Second, it gave the impression that suicide attempts among those with BPD are not very dangerous or threatening -- the cited article was in fact trying to counteract such an impression. Third, the rest of the paragraph covers the issue of suicidality as a sign or symptom quite thoroughly and with less POV. (Incidentally, I accidentally hit save page before I commented on the edit in the edit box -- I tried to fix that error, but could not find an edit button to do so. Still learning. Please accept my apologies.) William Fleeson ( talk) 02:02, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
There is a banner at the top of this page that says this article was once listed as a good article, and no longer is. It continues "Borderline personality disorder was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated." However, I don't see any suggestions. If there are such suggestions, please direct me to them. If there are not such suggestions, at what point should this article be renominated? I'm not saying it should be nominated now, I'm just wondering whether there are specific criteria or suggestions for this article beyond those in the general criteria for good articles. William Fleeson ( talk) 17:31, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
There appears to be many professionals who believe that Joan Crawford, as depicted in Mommie Dearest (film), has BPD. I found two citations from Google books within a few clicks. Bearian ( talk) 20:07, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
I think it's interesting that there are people talking about they're BPD diagnosis. Can we write something on the subject instead of just creating a list? Also, do the 2 books about Joan Crawford contain anything other than speculation? Do they include people who've interview her as sources? Reub2000 ( talk) 19:28, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Evidence suggests that individuals with BPD, while being high in intimacy- or novelty-seeking, can be hyper-alert
I can't make head or tail of this sentence as viable ensemble or contrast, and the source is paywalled. — MaxEnt 19:41, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
The article should explain the motive of a typical BPD person when she tells her partner that he is wonderful, that she loves him and that she couldn't survive without him. Minutes later, she shouts and him, telling him she hates him and that he is a worthless piece of shit. Do her feelings vacillate so rapidly and severely that she genuinely viscerally hates the same person that she loved only minutes earlier and that she cannot control her feelings or behaviour? Alternatively, is it a form of psychological warfare that she is deploying; if so, for what purpose? BPD people hate being or feeling abandoned, so why do they drive their partners away by often viciously insulting them and / or physically attacking them? It is obvious that if you want someone to love you and care about you, don't verbally or physically attack him. Why is it that BPD people frequently do what is severely detrimental to themselves as well as to those around them? 188.29.146.125 ( talk) 12:31, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
I typed an address for the site of a friend who is a musician. That address directed me to the Borderline Personality Disorders page on Wikipedia. I am wondering if this is someone's idea of a sick joke. Matildatwerp ( talk) 21:39, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
I'm wondering why Venlafaxine isnt mentioned in the meds section? Its a newer antidepresant with good results in depression with anxiety comorbid, which the article states (in other sections ) is quite common in BPD people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.33.34.79 ( talk) 09:48, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
The following needs clarity, IMO:
"Some mental health professionals (and the DSM-IV[13]) describe individuals with BPD as deliberately manipulative or difficult, but analysis and findings generally trace behaviors to inner pain and turmoil, powerlessness and defensive reactions, or limited coping and communication skills.[14][15][n 4] There has been limited research on family members' understanding of borderline personality disorder and the extent of burden or negative emotion experienced or expressed by family members.[16] Parents of individuals with BPD may show co-existing extremes of over-involvement and under-involvement."
The first sentence is disjointed. First, what "behaviors?" It seems to be about manipulation, but one of the sources is about self-mutilation. Second, the DSM is more than "some" mental health professionals, at least in the U.S. If we're acknowledging that the "Bible of psychiatry" views manipulation as a characteristic of BPD, we shouldn't dismiss what we've just said in the same sentence. Otherwise, why bring it up at all? I argue for a simple statement that many BPDs display manipulative behavior (or are judged by the medical community to do so). Period. There are a number of sources that treat manipulation as a common symptom of BPD, including this 2007 study in the American Journal of Psychiatry: http://psychiatryonline.org/article.aspx?articleid=98510. If we want to explain the psychological sources of this behavior and note that "manipulation" can be a prejudicial concept, we can do so in a separate sentence using the citation we already have.
The second and third sentences here make no sense. The source for the second sentence says family members can suffer emotional difficulties of their own based on how much information they receive about BPD. The source for the third sentence says the involvement of family members in the lives of BPD sufferers may play some role in their destructive behaviors. At least based on the abstracts, neither source says anything about manipulation. Yet taken together, given their place in this paragraph, and given their poor construction, these sentences read as though they're blaming family members for the manipulative characteristic of BPD. These sentences belong elsewhere and need a rewrite.
I don't feel comfortable editing myself, as I get the impression this article has been the source of major contention. I mean no value judgment about BPD myself. It looks like this page has been scoured clean. Ctnelsen ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:58, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
I was referred to this page by a therapist on line after I talked to him about one of my close ones who has some sort of mental disorder that resembles BPD. But some of the simptoms mentined consistantly in this article are not present in this person. Like oscilating in idealizing a person and then devaluing the same person, or trying to harm oneself etc..but the other simptoms mentioned for BPD are prasent. Should this person be classified as having BPD or is he having a different type of disorder. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.194.80.234 ( talk) 13:51, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi all! I've added how BPD can affect reliability as a witness (under Controversies) and specified which brain abnormalities accompany the disorder. Should I remove these from the To-do list? Firecatalta ( talk) 07:13, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Great job! Feel free to remove it from the list. Lova Falk talk 07:47, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Earlier today an IP removed the section on Chinese psychiatry, and another editor reinstated it. Actually, looking at the info, the removal is correct (even if the original motivation wasn't). First, the section used a primary source for the information, which is always worrisome. More importantly, inclusion here was pure original research, and thus forbidden. Unless we can find a reference that explicitly says, "This disorder in China is the same as BPD", we cannot include it here. That is, we cannot look at the description of the Chinese disorder and say, "Hey, that's the same!" Doing so is an act of interpretation, and thus not allowed. Qwyrxian ( talk) 11:37, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
On the to do list it says: Add details about pre-adolescent diagnosis. I wonder if whoever put this on the to-do list really had enough knowledge of BPD. As the article correctly says: "... clinicians are discouraged from diagnosing anyone before the age of 18, due to adolescence and a still-developing personality." Some of the criteria for BDP are not uncommon and not pathological in children and adolescents. So I wonder if this really should be on the to-do list. Lova Falk talk 08:28, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi everyone!
I was looking at the Notable persons sections today after Jim Michael’s addition of Nicola Edgington, and I realized that I hadn’t checked the source for Mamoru Takuma yet. When I followed the source, the diagnosis of emotionally unstable personality disorder is only listed in the section copied below, in the paragraph at the bottom. This website’s links for this section of information all go to “Page not found” notices, and there are no other sources for this information listed on the page. I checked on Takuma’s Wikipedia page, and the information is backed up with the same unsourced website. Unless someone can find where the site sources their info for Takuma’s BPD diagnosis, the website does not meet Wikipedia guidelines for reliable sources – it is self-published (see the description in the upper right hand corner of its page), has no editorial oversight, and does not cite the info in it that is relevant to our article. Mamoru Takuma should be removed from the Notable persons with comorbid diagnoses section until a reliable source can be found. If anyone finds a reliable source, feel free to put him back in! Firecatalta ( talk) 19:26, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
午前08時頃 起床 午前09時30分 アパートの賃貸人にも復しゅうしようと考え、マンションを出る前に火を付けたたばこを布団の上に置く。午前9時30分過ぎに部屋をでる。火は自然に消えた。 午前09時40分 猛スピードで発進する車が住民の取り付けたビデオに録画 京都新聞 午前10時頃 池田市槻木町7-15秋田刃物店で7480円の出刃包丁を購入 時事通信 午前10時10分 大阪教育大附属池田小学校、自動車通用門に到着 12分頃? 体育館東側付近にて2年南組担任の教諭と遭遇する。教諭は宅間を父兄と勘違いして会釈する。宅間、そのまま校舎へと進む。 午前10時13分 南校舎に近づき1階の2年南組教室の窓越しに5名の児童を発見する。5名の児童は偶然、教室に残っていた子供たちだった。 同教室テラス側出入り口より襲撃、5人全員を刺殺 午前10時15分 宅間はテラスに出て、東に隣接する2年西組の教室を襲撃。 午前10時18分 学校より110番通報 午前10時20分 児童が逃げ込んだスーパーより119番通報 午前10時24分 学校より119番通報 午前10時25分 河上洋介教諭、矢野克巳副校長が宅間守を取り押さえる 犯行時の被告の精神状態 被告は、かねてから妄想性人格障害、非社会性人格障害及び情緒不安定性人格障害(衝動型)などの精神状態を示し、社会に適応することができず、社会や個人との摩擦が絶えなかったが、犯行時及び前後を通じ、責任能力に影響を及ぼすような精神障害には何らかかっていなかった。
p.s. having trouble linking; still figuring out how! So, here is the Wiki article for identifying reliable sources, for those who want to have a look: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources#Questionable_sources Firecatalta ( talk) 19:26, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Unfortunately, DSM has forbidden us to cite their diagnosis criteria. I had heard about it, but was not sure, so I asked at Wikipedia talk:Copyright violations, and well, it's true. So I blanked the section. As far as I understand from the discussion, the criteria can neither be copied, nor can they be paraphrased closely. Lova Falk talk 06:04, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Have any notable non-Americans ever been diagnosed with borderline personality disorder? As a non-American, none of the people listed now are notable to me anyway. HiLo48 ( talk) 23:29, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
Adolf Hitler is often cited as being a BPD. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.150.95.237 ( talk • contribs) 14:24, 6 December 2012
Okay, I didn´t knew about this. Thanks for letting me know. 188.179.184.76 ( talk) 07:53, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
The info below is mostly correct, except for the time frame on mood swings in BPD, which is really minutes - days, not weeks; I already took off the ridiculous duration of "months" in one of my previous edits. However, not a word is present in the source provided, unless I'm missing something. The info would be useful, so ultimately I would like us to keep it, but first we need to find a source that actually provides it. And I would like to clean up the wording, too; this is not the clearest explanation I've ever seen. I'll keep an eye out for more sources, hopefully the info will be in one of the sources already provided for this section, and let me know if you guys find anything! Also, the source does give a nice overview of treatment options (from a behavioral perspective) for BPD and diagnostic methods, so that might be nice to incorporate into the relevant sections at some point.
Removed info: Symptoms known as " mood swings" are common in both BPD and bipolar disorders. In borderline personality disorder, the term refers to marked intensity and variability of mood citation needed, typically in response to external psychosocial and intrapsychic stressors. Changes in mood, and changes in intensity, may occur abruptly and last for minutes, hours, days, or weeks. [2]
Here's a link to the source for those who are interested:
http://65.122.17.152/BAT%20Journal/VOL-10/BAT%2010-1.pdf#page=13
Firecatalta (
talk) 04:39, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
The study by Grant et al. (2008) was cited as finding significant differences in prevalence rates between sexes. In the actual article's abstract, and in its results section, the authors note that they found no statistically significant differences between men and women on prevalence rates. I corrected the error. Calitheic ( talk) 16:47, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
And now... for something more cheerful. What do you others think about nominating DPB as a good article? Lova Falk talk 10:06, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
It seems we agree on "Adverse childhood experiences". The second part of your comment opens up a whole new line of thinking, because according to attachment theory, an important function of the caretaker is to regulate the infant's emotions. (The infant is upset, cries, gets comforted by a parent and the infant calms down - a emotional regulation that eventually can be internalized.) So maybe the intense emotions and problems to process them (in some cases??) can be traced back (caused by??) caretakers' inadequate response to their infant. But right now I am just thinking aloud - you are the one with the good sources. I don't know if there are any good sources, and I actually doubt that it is a generally accepted view (even though I personally think it makes good sense). Lova Falk talk 20:26, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi guys!
So today someone edited the Notable people section to include the following:
Lauren Collier/Martin/Ruth, 27 year old female from Lancaster, PA. Serial dater and master seductress. Used sex and conversations of future relationship/marriage/family, with multiple men to get money and sense of security. Was extremely scared of abandonment, she will seek out multiple partners. She was a chronic liar who created false stories to gather sympathy of family and friends. Married a new partner two months after a divorce was final, while dating three men at the same time. She also lied about being pregnant to obtain money from the men. [3] [4]
And it got me thinking about the pros & cons of the Notable people section. On the one hand, I think it's interesting and informative, and helps point out prominent people who live with BPD. I think that can help reduce stigma, and for those who are in the Notable people section for criminal activity, it can help raise awareness about the severity of the disorder (though most are in the comorbid diagnosis section). On the other hand, I think there is a tendency to put in sensationalized criminals, such as Jeffrey Dahmer, and a tendency to make claims about people in the format quoted above, which could be stigmatizing to people who live with BPD. So I'm wondering what you all think about this section: is it a useful and necessary section for a medical/psychiatric/psychology article? Does it have potential to stigmatize or gloss over this illness, by highlighting people who are either criminals or football players? Are there changes we could make that could incorporate the information about notable people while still addressing these issues? I'd love to hear your thoughts. Firecatalta ( talk) 00:36, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
I am frankly tired of people deleting the reference to the SF novel Komarr, and its character Tien Vorsoisson, because they think that it is merely fannish speculation that Vorsoisson has BPD. Yes, the reference is to a mailing list archive, a mailing list of the author's fans. But the specific message cited was written by the author herself, participating on that mailing list, as shown in that message. For God's sake, before one claims that a reference isn't adequate to substantiate its referent, one should read it. BunsenH ( talk) 04:26, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
I propose a removal of the subsection notable people with BPD, and the one with comorbid diagnoses. They are trivia sections that don't contribute to our understanding of BPD. Lova Falk talk 19:47, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
My name is Jamie. I am a 32 year old female. I have recently been diagnosed with BPD. I am very discouraged and overwhelmed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.41.94.211 ( talk) 21:35, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello all,
The journal "Innovations in Clinical Neuroscience" (ICN) has been used for one of the sources in this article. For those who are not aware, the internet age has birthed a new phenomenon of what are known as predatory journals, which are journals that attempt to masquerade as a legitimate, peer-reviewed journal. These journals typically involve various forms of deceit (such as inventing fake professors to chair their editorial boards) and solicit or produce articles solely for profit. Their articles typically do not meet basic academic standards.
"Innovations in Clinical Neuroscience," a source recently used to back up information for the BPD article, is one such journal. The first and most significant warning sign is that this journal's main editor is a person who does not exist, or who if he does exist does not hold the position that the journal claims he holds. The journal claims that "Amir H. Kalali" holds a professorial position in the department of Psychiatry at the University of California, San Diego, but looking at the list of professors at UC San Diego demonstrates that "Kalali" does not hold any position there.
The journal's next editor, "Ahmed Aboraya," supposedly holds a professorial position at the West Virginia School of Osteopathic Medicine. He does not. I could continue with the rest of the editors on this "editorial board," but fabricating even 2 members of their editorial board is ridiculous enough as is.
Journals that involve deceit of this and other kinds are not considered reliable sources by the scientific community. As such, we should not be using any articles by ICN as sources for this or any other wikipedia article. Please spread awareness of this phenomenon in any setting that you deem appropriate, and I will be removing all information based on ICN sources from the BPD article momentarily.
For more information on how to identify a predatory journal, see the following: http://scholarlyoa.com/2012/11/30/criteria-for-determining-predatory-open-access-publishers-2nd-edition/
Best, Firecatalta ( talk) 21:15, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
the classification 301.83 refers to the DSM and not to the ICD as shown on the right side in the begining — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.94.95.111 ( talk) 07:19, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi all,
We've spoken previously about nominating this article for good article status, and I think we're ready! My last question is, do we know if the same issues about copyright apply to the posting of DSM 5 criteria as they did to the DSM-IV criteria? If so, we'll want to edit those out prior to applying for GAS. Great job everyone!
Firecatalta ( talk) 02:47, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
Restored "indiscriminate" to the text from an earlier edit. It differentiates between indiscriminate sex and orgy sex. Indiscriminate sex can imply sex either with individuals or with groups. The original text used "Promiscuous", but this is a loaded word that carries with it an implied judgment as to the nature of the behavior. "Indiscriminate", however, is a neutral word. -- Corjay ( talk) 03:32, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)