Follow Me on Twitter!

Find me on twitter @TroyComets

Wednesday, March 30, 2016

The Anti-LGBT Bill of Glenn Gruenhagen

On March 30, 2016, Raw Story ran this article on a MN State Representative by the name of Glenn Gruenhagen.  Mr. Gruenhagen has introduced a piece of legislation into the MN House of Representatives to identify LGBT people as “mentally ill” and “in need of treatment.”  The basis of his argument?  The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Fifth Edition (DSM-V).

The DSM-V is the guidebook produced by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) as a tool to help identify mental health issues and deviations.  I will admit that I’m not well versed on the DSM-V; it was in the process of final approval and publication when I made career changes.  But I know the DSM-IV and I know how to use the Manual in general.  I also know that Mr. Gruenhagen’s interpretation of this admittedly problematic diagnostic criteria for an identity disorder is neither in keeping with the science nor the ethics behind the DSM-V.

I’m not going to get into the ins and the outs of the actual diagnostic criteria for Gender Dysphoria because sometimes nitpicking psychological terms completely misses the point.  Besides, it’s not like Mr. Gruenhagen has released the actual reference or any literature in support of his position so that the academic community can respond to specific misinterpretations and misrepresentations.   I guarantee it’s not a licensed psychologist or psychiatrist that brought this to his attention. 

The American public in general often misunderstands what the DSM actually is.  We’re so accustomed to going to our doctors, laying out our symptoms, and having the doctor run through the rolodex in his mind or his little pocket book or an app to help identify our symptoms.  Psychology is different.  We look at the symptoms but we also consider how those symptoms may or may not affect one’s quality of life or day to day functioning.  We also consider environmental influences which could trigger symptoms.

The whole point to the DSM is to give a framework for treatment and not diagnosis.  When you look at a list of diagnostic criteria in the DSM, it may list five or seven areas of behavior that are negatively influenced because a disruption or disturbance in development or the environment or coping with the environment.  Depending on the diagnostic category, to appropriately apply the diagnosis the patient/client must meet a certain number of the criteria listed.  In short, it’s like a “check all that apply” list of maladaptive behaviors and/or maladaptive coping.  If the patient/client falls short, the diagnosis doesn’t apply.  The trick is, when doing this, is to look at the right criteria for the right problem.  For example, “depression” is a diagnosis of its own but it’s also a symptom in a variety of other diagnoses. 

But again the idea with the DSM isn’t to find the right label or labels for the patient/client.  The insurance companies like these labels because a lot of insurance companies will look in their Big Books of Money Saving Policies and say, “Oh.  Depression.  We’ll pay for six visits to a therapist for treatment because, on average, it takes six therapeutic sessions to treat depression.”  Which is a bunch of hogwash.  But that’s our healthcare system.

Once the provider has determined what the struggle is, however, an approach to treatment can begin. 

One of the MANY things Mr. Gruenhagen fails to realize in his hate-bill is that “disorder” is not “disease.”  A disorder is not an illness.  A disorder is what it says it is:  Not order.  Something is out of whack, either in the person’s thought processes, coping strategies, acceptance of reality, or environmental.  Yes, environmental.  A person can be diagnosed as 995.82 (Adult psychological abuse by nonspouse or nonpartner, Suspected, Subsequent encounter).  The damage caused by the abuse will need to be dealt with, but the disorder is caused externally, environmentally.  The disruption in the normal ordered thinking/feeling/behaving pattern is DISordered because of the environment.

When the DSM-V was being developed, I remember quite a bit of discussion among my peers about the gender and sexuality criteria and the diagnostic labels.  It’s problematic.  Our understanding is constantly changing.  Science, particularly our understanding of human psychology, is developing almost as quickly as computer technology.  The moment you buy a computer it’s outdated.  The moment the DSM-V was finally approved by the APA and printed it was outdated in a lot of respects.  Mr. Gruenhagen is treating the DSM-V like he treats his Bible—it says it, black and white, so that must be what it means now and forever.  And just like his approach to the Bible, Mr. Gruenhagen is too ignorant and too lazy to actually educate himself on what it is he’s reading.  (I’d be willing to have a conversation about Mr. Gruenhagen’s theology another time.)

I think a lot of psychiatrists and psychologists would agree with me when I say:  With Gender Identity Disorder, there is a disruption in the order of thinking/feeling/behaving but most of that disruption is aggravated by factors outside the person’s internal struggle for identification.  Namely:  Fear of judgment, fear of rejection, fear of politicians who want to label them abnormal and force them into behavioral conditioning camps where, perhaps, they can “pray the trans away.”  It doesn’t work that way.

I’ve posted recently two entries on my blog listing specific statistics identified by scientists describing mental health and the LGBT community.  The crux of the problem is not an internal one.  It is external.  It’s about how individuals and systems around the LGBT individual complicate coping and development.  (You can read these posts here and here.)

So, fine, if Mr. Gruenhagen wants to draw attention to the disordering of LGBT people, I hope he’s ready to pass legislation to ease that disordering.  Equal protection, equal access, anti-discrimination….basically all the things Mr. Gruenhagen has stood against in his tenure in the Minnesota House of Representatives.  Since his first key vote on January 27, 2011, Mr. Gruenhagen has voted:

  • To prohibit same sex marriage  [SF1308]
  • Increase requirements for Abortion Providers [SF1921]
  • Voted against an authorization for same sex marriage [HF1054]
  • Voted against requiring schools to establish antibullying policies (HF826]
  • Voted against approving the MN HHS Biennium Budget [HF1233]
  • Voted against the MN Health Insurance Exchange [HF5]
  • Voted against expanding Medicaid [HF9]
  • Voted against increasing equal pay and establishing workplace protections foe employees [HF2536]


It’s quite clear that, despite how he’s trying to portray himself with this anti-LGBT bill, he’s not interested in mental health care, health care, or services and policies that would change the environment and people’s perceptions in order to mitigate the symptomology which is disrupting the order of LGBT people’s lives. 

Mr. Gruehagen’s agenda is clear and it’s one of barbaric, religiously superstitious regression.  I mean, this is the guy who stood on the floor of the MN House and advocated that in order to end bullying we need to start beating our children. 

Honestly, though, we shouldn’t be surprised by Mr. Gruenhagen’s inability to understand how to interpret and apply the DSM-V.  He’s an insurance agent.  His professional reading is limited to an understanding of black and white.  I’m not disrespecting insurance agents; I have a number who I consider close friends.  But that is how their brains are wired.  Psychology is never black and white.  I hope he figures this out sooner rather than later.  Not that I care how badly he’s embarrassing himself; he’s making his bed and he can lie it.  My concern is how backwards he is making the State of Minnesota look by continuing to fight these old battles on which not only the citizens have spoken but science made its determination nearly fifty years ago.  And my BIGGEST concern is the continuing damage he is doing to LGBT individuals by prolonging a way of thinking that has been demonstrated to be grievously harmful to LGBT people time and time again. 

Or, I suppose, Mr. Gruenhagen’s bill might have absolutely nothing to do with actually helping people.  This might just be the Trump approach to politics:  Say whatever, do whatever, and soak up the attention.  After all, it’s clear from his anti-LGBT bill and his voting record he’s not about healing and wholeness.  To know what he’s really about, you can check out his entire voting record here

Share it forward!

Follow me on Twitter @TroyComets

No comments:

Post a Comment