Ah, this is the one that really gets us. You hear it all the time – people claiming that they are a bit OCD about their clothes or because they always arrange their crisp packets according to colour. There’s one thing they’re forgetting about though… the D in OCD. Disorder.
In order to get a diagnosis of OCD, you have to experience considerable distress and spend a lot of time on these compulsions and obsessions.
Yes, we all have obsessions (see this blog post about that) and yes, we all have rituals (whether it’s saluting magpies to lucky charms), but we don’t all have the disorder side of it.
By using OCD to mean finicky, neat and tidy, particular or to describe your quirks, you are minimising the suffering of the thousands of OCD sufferers who live with this debilitating condition every day. OCD ruins people’s lives. It leads to broken marriages, unemployment, dropping out of studies and even suicide.
So that’s the one thing that I want you to remember this week. The one thing that I want you to spread the word about. Stop using OCD and trivialising this serious condition.
Check out this video where Ashley Fulwood CEO of the charity OCD-UK shares his expert advice on this subject over on our YouTube channel
Like any self-respecting French student, I have a two-hour break for lunch each day. It’s just enough time for me to walk the 25 minutes home, stopping off to buy my baguette on the way (unfortunately not wearing a beret or with a string of onions or garlic draped around my neck). Yesterday, as I was leaving the boulangerie I walked past the shelf full of pick and mix, including a huge box of chocolate bears. Suddenly, the thought struck me that I could steal one and that nobody would know. I quickly brushed it away and went on with my day, but it made me think about the universality of intrusive thoughts, something that is sometimes hard for someone with OCD to understand and accept.
In 1978, Stanley Rachman and Padmal de Silva interviewed 8 patients with OCD and 124 non-clinical subjects (people who didn’t have OCD) about the presence of intrusive thoughts and impulses that were deemed to be unacceptable by the respondents, as well as how frequent they were and how easy to dismiss. The results were fascinating – to quote directly from the paper…
To conclude Study I, obsessions (thoughts andior impulses) are a very common experience. There are no sex or age-related differences in occurrence, and most thoughts and impulses are easily dismissed. There are individual variations in the threshold of acceptability of obsessional thoughts or impulses.
– Rachman & de Silva (1978)
They then looked at the content of these intrusive thoughts and urges – can you guess which of the following lists were intrusive thoughts reported by the 8 people with OCD and which were reported by the 40 individuals in the non-clinical group?
Were these impulses and thoughts from people with or without OCD?
Intrusive thoughts and urges –
Impulse to jump out of window Impulse to attack and harm someone Thought of ‘disgusting’ sexual acts with males (male subject) Thought whether he has been poisoned by chemicals Thought that his eyes will be/are harmed
What about these ones – OCD or not OCD?
Impulsive thoughts and urges –
Thought that she, her husband and baby (due) would be greatly harmed because of exposure to asbestos, with conviction that there are tiny asbestos dust particles in the house Thought whether any harm has come to his wife Impulse to shout at and abuse someone Impuise to crash car, when driving Impulse to attack and violently punish someone
The answer is that the first list comes from people with OCD and that the second list is entirely thoughts and urges reported by people from the non-clinical group. Don’t worry if you didn’t guess – Rachman and de Silva then presented the lists to a group of psychologists, and to quote from the paper –
It appears that the judges were not able to identify the clinical obsessions too well, but on the other hand they were moderately good at identifying non-clinical obsessions. From this we can conclude that clinical obsessions are not as readily discernible-even to experienced clinicians-as might be expected.
Rachman & de Silva (1978)
Back to the chocolate bears. I was able to brush this thought away, to see it as illogical and ego-dystonic (inconsistent with my beliefs and personality – in other words, I’d never steal. I’m far too much of a wimp) and therefore not concentrate on it, but this isn’t always the case. Had my OCD seized upon the thought, I could have interpreted it very differently, tangling myself into a web of doubt and worry over what it meant. How could I think such a thing? What does that mean? Does it make me a terrible person?
Take the classic CBT model of the vicious flower (see below), the trigger (the thought that I could steal the chocolate) would be misinterpreted as “I am a terrible person, probably a thief or a criminal”, which would cause emotional reactions (guilt, distress etc.), safety behaviours (trying to push the thought away) and neutralising actions (asking for reassurance that I wasn’t a terrible person, trying to rack my brain to see if I had previously done something similar etc.). I would probably try to avoid going into shops where I could steal, and soon my life would be revolving around this thought.
And yet this didn’t happen. Instead, I went home, had a very nice ham sandwich and went on with my day.
It’s a funny old thing, OCD, isn’t it?
TD&M Bellsie
THE VICIOUS FLOWER
How can No Panic help? No Panic specialises in self-help recovery and our services include: Providing people with the skills they need to manage their condition and work towards recovery. Our aim is to give you all of the necessary advice, tools and support that you will need to recover and carry out this journey. No Panic Recovery Programs
