Internet Addiction Disorder (IAD) began as a ruse, a term coined by Dr. Ivan Goldberg in 1995, based on pathological gambling according to the fourth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV). Despite the joke, followers took the “disorder” seriously due to the very real obsession many people have with various online activities. Subsequently, Internet Addiction Disorder has taken on a life of its own, moving from being a mere hoax to a potential illness that many believe has roots in reality.
An ADSL modem, one of the ways to connect to the Internet.
Adherents often divide Internet Addiction Disorder into categories that reflect different types of online addictions that consistently express themselves beyond the generous bounds of keen interest or dedicated hobby. Categories such as inappropriate engagement in social networks or blogs, obsessive gaming, habitual pornography, and incessant shopping are some examples.
Social scientists and psychiatrists increasingly define excessive Internet use as addictive behavior.
At least one researcher (and co-author of Breaking Free Of The Web: Catholics And Internet Addiction), Kimberly Young, PSY. D., supports the inclusion of Internet Addiction Disorder in the upcoming fifth edition of the DSM. However, the American Medical Association (AMA) did not make a recommendation to the body responsible for updating the manual (the American Psychiatric Association), other than recommending more research on what differentiates “overuse” from “addiction”. The general opposition to recognizing IAD as a bona fide disorder is largely based on a view that attributes online addiction to existing disorders such as depression, attention deficit disorder (ADD) and compulsive disorders, in which that harmful behaviors online are byproducts of these established disorders. diseases.
The behavior of an Internet addict can negatively affect their ability to sleep.
One concern with the classification of Internet Addiction Disorder as a legitimate illness centers on the insurance industry. Opponents argue that treatment, when needed, is already being offered by identifying the problem as one of the underlying conditions cited. The establishment of a new disease based on the excessive use of the Internet could be an invitation to a veritable barrage of frivolous claims.
People addicted to the Internet can feel uncomfortable when trying to spend time offline.
A 2005 study by IDC of Framingham Mass., a subsidiary of the world’s leading technology research firm, International Data Group (IDG), estimates that 30% to 40% of Internet use in the workplace it is not job related. A 2006 study conducted at Stanford University found that one in eight people surveyed had one or more signs of Internet addiction. Assuming for a moment that IAD enters DSM-IV as a disturbance, what can happen when an employee is repeatedly reprimanded for surfing the web, chatting, emailing, or gaming? Could employers end up handing over insurance money to treat what may just be lazy employees? How could this ‘Internet use as abuse’ classification affect the bottom line for businesses large and small? Employee insurance premiums and deductibles? Or not?
At least one man does not expect an official classification. In Paceza v. IBM Corp., No. 04 CIV. 5831 (SDNY Jul 27, 2004), James Pacenza filed a $5 million lawsuit against former employer IBM Corp. for wrongful termination, citing the Americans with Disabilities Act. Pacenza was fired due to his predilection for visiting adult chat rooms at work. A Vietnam veteran, Pacenza claims that post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) led him to get involved in adult chat rooms as a way to relieve stress. This in turn led to a sex addiction. Pacenza believes that IBM should have treated him for his addiction, rather than fire him.
The Center for Internet Addiction Recovery in Bradford, Pennsylvania provides a list of several warning signs of Internet Addiction Disorder. consequently, responding affirmatively to five or more of these warning signs puts one squarely in the IAD camp. Some of the signs include online preoccupation to the exclusion of almost everything else in one’s life, regularly spending more time online than intended, hiding online activities from loved ones or employers, jeopardizing jobs or relationships by addiction, and a feeling of restlessness when trying to stay offline.
If you are concerned about the amount of time you spend online, professional help is available even without a formal classification of Internet Addiction Disorder. Talk to a counselor or visit online resources to learn more.
People who have Internet addiction disorder may isolate themselves from others.
