Internet Addiction Disorder (IAD) was originally a joke but has become a potential disease with categories such as social networking, gaming, pornography, and shopping. Some support its inclusion in the DSM-IV, while others believe it is a byproduct of existing disorders. Concerns about its classification as a legitimate disease center on the insurance industry. A 2005 study found that 30-40% of workplace internet use is not work-related, and a 2006 study found that one in eight people exhibit signs of internet addiction. The Center for Internet Addiction Recovery provides warning signs, and professional help is available.
Internet Addiction Disorder (IAD) began as a ruse, the term coined by Dr. Ivan Goldberg in 1995, modeled after pathological gambling according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) 4th Edition . Despite the joke, supporters have taken the “clutter” seriously due to the very real obsession many people have with various online activities. Internet Addiction Disorder has subsequently taken on a life of its own, going from a mere hoax to a potential disease that many believe has roots in reality.
Proponents often subdivide Internet Addiction Disorder into categories that reflect different types of online addictions that are consistently expressed beyond the generous bounds of keen or dedicated hob interest. Categories such as inappropriate social networking or blogging, obsessive gaming, habitual pornography, and incessant shopping are some examples.
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. The American Medical Association (AMA), however, did not provide a recommendation to the body responsible for updating the manual (the American Psychiatric Association), beyond recommending further research into what differentiates “abuse” from “addiction.” ”. The general opposition to the recognition of 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, for whose unhealthy online behaviors are byproducts of these established diseases.
A concern about the classification of Internet addiction disorder as a legitimate disease centers on the insurance industry. Opponents argue that treatment, when sought, is already offered by identifying the problem as one of the aforementioned underlying diseases. Establishing a new disease based on Internet overuse could result in a veritable flood of frivolous claims.
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 workplace Internet use is not work related . A 2006 study conducted at Stanford University found that one in eight people surveyed exhibited one or more signs of Internet addiction. Assuming for a moment that IAD enters the DSM-IV as a disorder, what might happen when an employee is reprimanded repeatedly for surfing the web, chatting, emailing, or playing games? Could employers end up handing out insurance money to treat what may simply be lazy employees? How might such a classification of “Internet use as abuse” affect the bottom lines of small and large businesses? Of insurance premiums and deductibles for employees? Or would it be?
At least one man is not waiting for an official ranking. In Pace v. IBM Corp., no. 04 CIV. 5831 (SDNY July 27, 2004), James Pacenza filed a five million dollar lawsuit against former employer IBM Corp. for wrongful termination, citing the Americans With Disabilities Act. Pacenza was fired due to his bias visiting adult chat rooms at work. A Vietnam veteran, Pacenza says post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) has led to engagement in adult chat rooms as a way to relieve stress. This in turn led to a sex addiction. Pacenza believes IBM should have cured his addiction rather than fired him.
The Center for Internet Addiction Recovery in Bradford, Pennsylvania provides a list of various warning signs of Internet Addiction Disorder. Consequently, answering yes to five or more of these warning signs puts one right in the IAD field. Some of the signs include worrying online to the exclusion of almost everything else in one’s life, regularly spending more time than expected online, hiding online activities from loved ones or employers, putting one’s job or relationships at risk for addiction and a sense of unease when you want to stay offline.
If you are concerned about the amount of time you spend online, professional help is available even without a formal Internet Addiction Disorder classification. Speak to a counselor or visit online resources for more information.
Protect your devices with Threat Protection by NordVPN
