Video Gaming Addiction Classified as a Disorder

[HOGIE838EIRE]

Addiction to video games has been recognised by the World Health Organisation as a mental health disorder.

The WHO's latest reference bible of recognised and diagnosable diseases describes addiction to digital and video gaming as "a pattern of persistent or recurrent gaming behaviour" that becomes so extensive that it "takes precedence over other life interests".

The International Classification of Diseases (ICD), which has been updated over the past ten years, now covers 55,000 injuries, diseases and causes of death.

Online and offline "gaming disorder" is grouped with "disorders due to substance use or addictive behaviours" in the ICD's 11th edition, known as ICD-11.

The wording of the new entries has been known since January, when the WHO announced problem gaming would be recognised as a pathological condition.

Key symptoms include "impaired control" - notably the inability to stop playing - and focusing on the game to the exclusion of everything else.

In extreme cases, gamers unable to pry themselves away from a screen drop out of school, lose jobs, and become cut off from family and non-gaming friends.

Symptomatic behaviour must continue for at least a year before it is considered dangerously unhealthy, according to the new classification.

Edited June 19, 2018 by HOGIE838IRE

[Lance_87]

 

Oh wait...

[GuerrerDaurat]

Your thread title is misleading, video games are not classified as a disorder, but the addiction to them.

[HOGIE838EIRE]

Sorry I’m in work and I just typed quick lol here’s the link anyway:

 

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.rte.ie/amp/971345/

[AJ_Radio]

In some cases people aren't able to pry themselves away from video games. But this is no different from being addicted to television or being addicted to movies or music in place of doing what you need to be doing for school or work.

 

If you missed out on a final exam or missed a few days of work because you decided to play video games, that's entirely your fault. You have nobody to blame but yourself, and I think classifying video game addiction as a disorder is just ridiculous.

 

Politicians and health experts always try to blame video games for being the cause of mass shootings, or blaming video games are too violent. They're the same morons that try to sue Rockstar Games because some kid got in trouble for emulating what Franklin, Trevor or Michael did in Grand Theft Auto V. Most of these so called experts barely know anything about video games anyway, they just see games that show a zombies head getting blown off or their body exploding and they automatically think that's just too gory and violent.

 

They'll go to great lengths to ensure that children, regardless of age and how they were brought up, should not see that content. Instead of blaming video games and classifying video game addiction as a disorder, they should look to see if the child or adult has a history with mental health. If they're mentally unstable and can't bring themselves to take a break from video games, the problem is the person, not the video games. 

 

Not that any of this shit is new anyway. These guys blamed World of Warcraft for a great number of things. Back when I played the game much of it revolved around raids and dungeons, if you were a raid leader you had to get the right gear and setup, and make sure your companions, who were other people playing, were doing their job. Being the head of a raiding clan took a lot of time commitment and effort, and for some that affected their lives with school, work, whatever they had to do in the real world to make a living. If that's what the World Health Organization is focusing on, that you just cannot keep yourself away from playing for several hours on a time on any given day, then the problem is you.

 

Having ESRB ratings? Fine, they're there for a good reason. You can still maintain a balanced life while playing video games. For me, it's a hobby. I enjoy playing a lot of different games, I enjoy going after achievements. Most of these people who state that there should be more restrictions to video games, and whom feel that there needs to be a warning label attached to them saying that this could make you an addict, are basically older people who have literally next to no knowledge on video games. The same morons who feel that The Walking Dead, a famous and well respected television series, should be pulled from the airwaves because some kids might be exposed to it, or it's just too violent to be shown.

 

It's nothing new. My doctor once told me I played too many video games, and I took a step back and started implementing other activities into my life like exercising, keeping in contact with friends and family, and finding new hobbies for me to enjoy. A more balanced lifestyle. Saying video game addiction is a disorder is stupid.

[DrHambone]

I can kinda understand. Video games are addicting. I wouldn't say it's 'life damaging' though. Then again I don't know anyone or any cases where games consumed one's life. Back in the online PS2 days, I would game in the morning before school and all night after school. I actually lost like 80 pounds one summer playing Ratchet & Clank: Up Your Arsenal online non-stop.

 

But I think there are positive side effects to gaming like fast reaction skills, hand-eye coordination, and critical thinking skills.

[RadiantFlamberge]

Surprise, surprise.  I knew they'd say that.  Too much of anything, even if it's good in itself, is not a good thing.

That thread title needs just one more word: Excessive.

 

4 minutes ago, DrHambone said:

But I think there are positive side effects to gaming like fast reaction skills, hand-eye coordination, and critical thinking skills.

I feel the same.

[Azelais]

Taken from latest public ICD-11 draft (not from the latest released version): Gaming Disorder.

 

Quote

Gaming disorder is characterized by a pattern of persistent or recurrent gaming behaviour (‘digital gaming’ or ‘video-gaming’), which may be online (i.e., over the internet) or offline, manifested by:

 

1) impaired control over gaming (e.g., onset, frequency, intensity, duration, termination, context);

2) increasing priority given to gaming to the extent that gaming takes precedence over other life interests and daily activities; and

3) continuation or escalation of gaming despite the occurrence of negative consequences.

 

The behaviour pattern is of sufficient severity to result in significant impairment in personal, family, social, educational, occupational or other important areas of functioning. The pattern of gaming behaviour may be continuous or episodic and recurrent. The gaming behaviour and other features are normally evident over a period of at least 12 months in order for a diagnosis to be assigned, although the required duration may be shortened if all diagnostic requirements are met and symptoms are severe.

 

(Bold by me.)

[Honor_Hand]

Honestly, too much of "insert any kind of random activity here" can be addicting. It doesn't have to be video games per se, hell, even drinking water in excess is bad for your health. There are not that many good points for making anything excessively if it means deteriorating your health in the long run. 

 

While I think that the WHO is overanalyzing something that it is very simple and that didn't require any kind of official recognition (I guess?), I don't think video games should be blamed for causing this kind of behavior on people. If you allow a game to take over your other responsibilities on life, as Spaz said, the problem is you, not the game.

[Kittet3]

The APA has declined to add gaming addiction in their diagnosis books. Many people think it'll be way to overdiagnosis and studies have found that people with expected internet addiction often has complementary diagnosis that could attribute to the symptoms. Much like gambling, video games do trigger the reward part of the brain and if that part of the brain is damaged, then people can go overboard on them, but I am a strong believer that excessive video games and internet use is an effect of an underlying issue, not a cause.

 

I actually got pretty deep into Wikipedia reading about this stuff a few days ago, so take all this information with a grain of salt since I didn't dig deeper then the respective wikipedia articles. There's many stories about parents starving and neglecting their children because they were too busy playing video games. There's a kid that shot their parents because they took away their Halo game. Another kid went on a crime spree, tried to steal a car, and shot at police. There's people who had heart attacks after video game binges and died at young ages. There's also been suicides directly linked to video games.

 

In some countries, there's also treatment centers for children suffering from internet addiction. These centers are usually horrible, illegal conditions for the children as they try to "cure" them (think conversion therapy camps for internet use). One girl killed her grandparent after escaping from one of the camps.

 

I think there has to be more studies done before video games and internet are given their own addiction criteria.

[eigen-space]

2 hours ago, Spaz said:

My doctor once told me I played too many video games

Time to find a new doctor 

 

 

1 hour ago, Kittet3 said:

Much like gambling, video games do trigger the reward part of the brain and if that part of the brain is damaged, then people can go overboard on them, but I am a strong believer that excessive video games and internet use is an effect of an underlying issue, not a cause.

 

This. I personally think that the chemical dependencies/underlying cause of the addiction should be what is diagnosed rather than the mode used to feed that dependency. In the case of video game addiction or gambling addiction, perhaps it should be classified as something like "Dopamine Disorder" because that's typically the brain chemical these people are going after with gaming/gambling.

 

For the kid that shot his parents after taking away the game... that's probably psychopathy.

Edited June 19, 2018 by eigen-space

[SnowxSakura]

2 hours ago, Spaz said:

In some cases people aren't able to pry themselves away from video games. But this is no different from being addicted to television or being addicted to movies or music in place of doing what you need to be doing for school or work.

 

If you missed out on a final exam or missed a few days of work because you decided to play video games, that's entirely your fault. You have nobody to blame but yourself, and I think classifying video game addiction as a disorder is just ridiculous.

 

Politicians and health experts always try to blame video games for being the cause of mass shootings, or blaming video games are too violent. They're the same morons that try to sue Rockstar Games because some kid got in trouble for emulating what Franklin, Trevor or Michael did in Grand Theft Auto V. Most of these so called experts barely know anything about video games anyway, they just see games that show a zombies head getting blown off or their body exploding and they automatically think that's just too gory and violent.

 

They'll go to great lengths to ensure that children, regardless of age and how they were brought up, should not see that content. Instead of blaming video games and classifying video game addiction as a disorder, they should look to see if the child or adult has a history with mental health. If they're mentally unstable and can't bring themselves to take a break from video games, the problem is the person, not the video games. 

 

Not that any of this shit is new anyway. These guys blamed World of Warcraft for a great number of things. Back when I played the game much of it revolved around raids and dungeons, if you were a raid leader you had to get the right gear and setup, and make sure your companions, who were other people playing, were doing their job. Being the head of a raiding clan took a lot of time commitment and effort, and for some that affected their lives with school, work, whatever they had to do in the real world to make a living. If that's what the World Health Organization is focusing on, that you just cannot keep yourself away from playing for several hours on a time on any given day, then the problem is you.

 

Having ESRB ratings? Fine, they're there for a good reason. You can still maintain a balanced life while playing video games. For me, it's a hobby. I enjoy playing a lot of different games, I enjoy going after achievements. Most of these people who state that there should be more restrictions to video games, and whom feel that there needs to be a warning label attached to them saying that this could make you an addict, are basically older people who have literally next to no knowledge on video games. The same morons who feel that The Walking Dead, a famous and well respected television series, should be pulled from the airwaves because some kids might be exposed to it, or it's just too violent to be shown.

 

It's nothing new. My doctor once told me I played too many video games, and I took a step back and started implementing other activities into my life like exercising, keeping in contact with friends and family, and finding new hobbies for me to enjoy. A more balanced lifestyle. Saying video game addiction is a disorder is stupid.

I don't know, I'd tend to agree with their decision, there were quite a few people I knew in high school that were so addicted to gaming, they stopped coming to school, dropped out, barely slept, and now are either homeless or still live at home.

[Z1MZUM]

I read this on BBC yesterday and passed it off as fluff, Best addiction ever!

[AJ_Radio]

1 hour ago, Kittet3 said:

The APA has declined to add gaming addiction in their diagnosis books. Many people think it'll be way to overdiagnosis and studies have found that people with expected internet addiction often has complementary diagnosis that could attribute to the symptoms. Much like gambling, video games do trigger the reward part of the brain and if that part of the brain is damaged, then people can go overboard on them, but I am a strong believer that excessive video games and internet use is an effect of an underlying issue, not a cause.

 

I actually got pretty deep into Wikipedia reading about this stuff a few days ago, so take all this information with a grain of salt since I didn't dig deeper then the respective wikipedia articles. There's many stories about parents starving and neglecting their children because they were too busy playing video games. There's a kid that shot their parents because they took away their Halo game. Another kid went on a crime spree, tried to steal a car, and shot at police. There's people who had heart attacks after video game binges and died at young ages. There's also been suicides directly linked to video games.

 

In some countries, there's also treatment centers for children suffering from internet addiction. These centers are usually horrible, illegal conditions for the children as they try to "cure" them (think conversion therapy camps for internet use). One girl killed her grandparent after escaping from one of the camps.

 

I think there has to be more studies done before video games and internet are given their own addiction criteria.

 

Whether people like it or not, the world, now more than ever, largely depends on the internet.

 

The big issue here is children are very easily taken by what's around them. A good majority of households have computers, or at the least have a television. Children cling to television like candy, and when they're a little older they will probably treat a computer in the same fashion.

 

There's a famous story that surfaced over a decade ago of a Korean man who died after spending around 50 hours playing Starcraft at a Internet cafe. It was the very first story I remember that was hugely tied to internet/gaming addiction, because the man was in fact an addict. At that time people didn't pay a whole lot of attention to the consequences that was addiction, today people jump all over internet addiction simply because anybody and everybody in first world countries has access to it.

 

Are children so easily vulnerable to playing video games? I grew up on a Super Nintendo and Nintendo 64, and I turned out quite alright. The children that you describe were already so triggered by their emotions and daily habits that it only took one course of action before they went nuts.

 

Where I live if you so much as burn someone's house down or hurt someone because you wanted to do what a fictional character in a video game did, you go straight to prison. Minors are generally thrown in a juvenile prison, and when they turn 18 years of age they are in the big house.

 

It pisses me off that there is no real help anymore as far as mental health is concerned. There's a lot of children out there who are easily triggered from video games, and in regards to their mental health they could definitely use teaching and guiding by health professionals. But instead people will just take them to the police, whose job is not to teach children on mental health or provide assistance.

 

Is video game addiction a disorder? That's debatable.

 

It's nothing new. But you might as well lump it with alcohol addiction, television addiction or gambling addiction.

 

23 minutes ago, SnowxSakura said:

I don't know, I'd tend to agree with their decision, there were quite a few people I knew in high school that were so addicted to gaming, they stopped coming to school, dropped out, barely slept, and now are either homeless or still live at home.

 

This happens all the time. Our government does jack squat when it comes to helping them, because there is very little funding for mental health research.

 

Sad state of affairs, but in today's world that largely depends on the internet, this issue isn't going to stop anytime soon.

Edited June 19, 2018 by Spaz

[Azelais]

Someone (edit: oops, the someone with the super interesting point in their post was) @Honor_Hand has brought up a point I think is super important and that I'd like to pick up and elaborate on: the reason for official recognition. (I don't care to discuss the addition of Gaming Disorder all that much and want to focus a little on the reasons for recognising (behavioural) symptoms as disorders instead.)

 

 

 

Official recognition of behavioural patterns as a cluster of symptoms that together take on the appearance of a clinically significant impairment is primarily serving 3 important matters.

 

These being: awareness + treatment options + insurance.

 

Awareness.

 

Professionals know a lot, have learnt a lot, but aren't magical. If a disorder hasn't been defined, printed in a relevant diagnostic manual and mentioned in classes, the professional you seek out in order to assist with your significantly impairing 'issue' may not necessarily recognise it for what it is and help you sort it out. 

 

Lots of (working and unemployed, high- or low-income, happy family or single) adults who happen to have been diagnosed with AD(H)D at some point late in life have come a long way until their glaringly obvious  symptoms have not been recognised as being symptoms of AD(H)D in favour of, for example, (co-morbids such as) depression, bipolar or anxiety.

 

When I was a kid, a lot still thought that fridge moms caused autism and that it's a form of childhood schizophrenia. Even today there are professionals that will act as if 'the great majority' of people with Trisomy 21 (which has been around for some time, so you'd expect professional who regularly talks to parents expecting a baby to be really savvy about it) are severely or profoundly intellectually impaired and tell soon-to-be parents that there's an almost zero percent chance that their baby, if born, will ever learn basic self-help skills, least have a 'proper' relationships, be it with friends or a significant other. 

 

Depression and anxiety disorders in kids and younger teens isn't easily picked up by a professional that has specialised on the mood disorders in older teens and adults.

 

On the other hand, a clinic that has specialised on substance abuse and eating disorders (but that has gained awareness of addiction to gaming existing and being on the rise) may have just the right tools, knowledge and equips to (testingly) accept in someone with gaming disorder and, upon receiving a growing number of requests, may discover that they have developed a very successful concept for gaming addicts and are able to take in and treat more and more people with this disorder. 

 

Being aware of that certain similar clusters of behavioural symptoms can emerge in more than a single person, being aware of how these symptoms can manifest in different people is greatly dependent on a disorder having been recognised in official guidelines and professionals being made aware of that, when testing a patient for their 'issue', they ought to consider this disorder or that disorder as part of the diagnostic process.

 

Sure, a professional is able to be a detective and, with little prior knowledge other than his nifty skills as a doctor, investigate a radically rare disorder that only a handful of people on this planet are known to have (one so rare that it may not have a smart name even!) but it's a waste to spend that precious time and the limited resources (even those resources of our 'western' med systems which aren't particularly surplus in nature) on the investigation of much more common disorders. While starting in figurative Stone Age with every new case, whether that be depression or 'mystery disorder X', would potentially lead to a type of significantly improved and very patient-centered individualised medicine system, it's far from being a viable option in most societies as they currently are.

 

Treatment options.

 

A number of stories have gained popularity here in my place, hearsay as well as those picked up by the news, about gaming addicts seeking out professional help and being turned down time and again because treatment offers in clinics for addiction may include treatments for gambling and abuse of substances other than drugs, but don't include any for 'addiction to gaming'. (Funding plays a role in that, but I'll leave the money for #3.)

 

In order to offer you viable treatment that suits your 'issue', a professional will tend to refer to practises for similar disorders that have proven to be effective and adjust them to meet your needs and your very form of addiction. 

 

Then again, do you really want to be a guinea pig for years to come? Not to know the rate of success for the treatment you go under until you're done (and, perhaps, you come out of it none the better or worse than when you started)? Treatment options for newly recognised disorders need to be researched and found, explored (tested), adjusted to meet the specific needs of the target group, proven effective (unless you live in EU where improved effectiveness isn't all that important...), made cost-effective and, at best, need to be continuously improved and measured up against other, yet newer treatments. 

 

As a general rule, therapeutic means have come a long way until they have come to you to help with your depression, diabetes, cancer, HI or substance abuse.

 

Insurance.

 

If you have an 'issue' that is too severe for you with your personal background to solve on your own (with your current physical capacities, your family background, your schooling and further education, intelligence, cognitive abilities, personality, socio-emotional relationships...) but that is interfering with your ability to 'get things done' as required of someone like you, and you seek out a professional, then - as a general rule - he'll require payment. 

 

If you're willing and able to pay for yourself, you're good to go. In order for an insurance company to help you out, they will want to know what they are asked to pay for. And, among other things, whether helping you, even saving the life of your cute, otherwise healthy toddler by treating his metabolic disease with an expensive med is something that won't get them in trouble (are the meds safe or life-threatening to give to a toddler?), is worthwhile by 'common standards' (will the toddler really die (soon) in direct consequence of the underlying disorder or merely due to some related consequence that's outside the domain of health insurance?) and is something that they are obligated to do (can't have a company be gullible and generous, nor should an insurance company spend money on people who haven't a need for it nearly as much as others do - however you measure the approximate extend of 'need').

 

If your 'issue' isn't recognised as a gaming disorder by the ICD or DSM and the clinic that offers to treat you doesn't manage to get silly and 'uniquely creative' by writing down 'gambling addiction' or 'impulse control disorder-NOS' on your receipt, the clinic's attempt to get paid for treating your addiction will likely fare little better than you making up a yellow-duck disorder and asking for your weekly fun tea chats about kittens and box office bombs with a professional that happens to be your best buddy in disguise to be funded by your health insurance company. 

 

Your health insurance company isn't obligated to pay for matters unrelated to your health. This is just one reason that makes it essential to have your 'issue' (whatever it may be, however 'physical and real' the common layperson may think of it) recognised in some form - either by making it a new disorder with a name or by explicitly adding it as another form of manifestation to an older disorder. 

 

Edited June 19, 2018 by Aze

[DrBloodmoney]

I think someone needs to classify “arguing against a body of experts despite having no training yourself” as a disorder.

 

They could call it “Arogantitus”.

 

The WHO has to base it’s conclusion on the opinions of medical professionals. We base our conclusions on our own half-arsed, uninformed opinions. 

I think they probably have more of a leg to stand on than we do...

 

 

Yeah, games are addictive.

They are designed to be, in the same way as gambling is designed to be. Hell, the free-to-play models and microtransaction based games learned their psychological manipulation directly from the gambling industry - is anyone seriously gonna argue that gambling addiction isn’t a disorder? Take a look at any casino bar late in a midweek evening and you’ll reevaluate pretty quick.

 

This story doesn’t mean everyone is gonna get suckered into destroying their lives, and it doesn’t mean that the big bad government overlords are going to try and take your games away - it just means having a professional body acknowledge that the people who get seriously addicted could do with some organised, structured and peer-reviewed help.

Classifying the disorder allows the methods that help to be more easily shared and allows peer-to-peer research to spread good ideas faster and weed out bad ones.

 

It is insane to me to hear self-identified ‘gamers’ claim this is stupid, or shouldn’t be done, especially when we all know games are addictive. Why wouldn’t you want to help out other gamers who get the bug too bad?

 

Here’s an experiment - open any random game discussion thread on this forum and scan down the posts - I bet you dollars to doughnuts that you find the word ‘addictive’ or ‘addicting’ in the first few pages.

Sure, sometimes we are exaggerating for effect, but it’s only an exaggeration. It’s not an outright lie, and if you find it ‘addicting’ but don’t have a serious problem, great, but there will always be someone else out there who gets bitten way harder.

 

What’s wrong with classifying that side of the addiction under an umbrella term, to help people help them?

 

 

 

Edited June 19, 2018 by DrBloodmoney

[DrBloodmoney]

32 minutes ago, SoberNSane said:

I was hoping someone like @DrBloodmoney would come along and be the voice of reason here.  Just because most of us have experienced the benefits of gaming is no reason to deny the dangers attached. 

 

I know it stings to hear it from your doctor. I also bought exercise equipment as a result... Lovin it by the way. Games can give you stress relief and they can also cause stress. My health has never been great and I’ve hurt myself more times than I can count going after a stupid trophy. Yes, I take responsibility and I’m getting better....

 

We have to keep an open mind and continue to learn. I’m expecting gaming to keep me sharp as I get older. That is if I get older........

 

Thank you for that - this is something I care quite a bit about, not least because in December this year I will be 10 years sober.

 

There there is nothing more simultaneously unhelpful and mind-numbingly stupid as the kind of people who are drinkers, but argue against things like alcohol dependancy units or medical treatment centres, simply because they are uncomfortable with admitting the idea that the thing that they enjoy could be detrimental if they fall into it too hard. 

 

It almost always stems from weakness too - the people who yell the hardest about how “it’s not a real problem”, “why don’t they just stop” etc. are almost always the ones who are closest to falling down that slippery slope themselves - they don’t want to admit anyone elses problems are legitimate, because to do so would be to acknowledge how close they are joining them...

 

 

There will be plenty of non-gaming, judgemental assholes who tell these poor sods who are playing Fortnight for 36 hours straight binges and blowing their life savings on microtransactions in Clash Royale “It’s not a real addiction, get over it.”

That sucks, but at least that stems from a lack of knowledge of games. 

 

It will double suck for the people who are deep in their addiction if gamers (who should understand how it can happen) start ganging up and telling them the same shit too,  just because they don’t want to admit they also probably play a little bit too much and don’t want to feel they have to justify it.

 

There is a big difference between ‘Playing too much’ and ‘Having an addiction.’

 

The first one is just between you and your wife/husband/girlfriend/boyfriend.

The second one needs to be between you and your doctor.

 

 

Edited June 19, 2018 by DrBloodmoney

[SnowxSakura]

51 minutes ago, DrBloodmoney said:

 

Thank you for that - this is something I care quite a bit about, not least because in December this year I will be 10 years sober.

.

 

 

Congratulations! It's a long road, but definitely worth it. I'll be 3 years sober this September, so I definitely understand how important it is to officially classify and understand addiction, so people that truly want help, can receive the right care.