Pickard (2011) looks at what personality (PD) disorder is. In doing so, she first looks at the definition, where the condition is defined as a pattern of behavior which significantly varies with the expectations of an individual’s culture. It can be manifested through a combination of two or more factors manifestations which include affectivity or the insensibility, range, liability and appropriateness of emotional response. There is also the cognitive aspect which includes the manner in which people interprets himself, other people and events. The third aspect involves the interpersonal functioning which is the relationship between an individual and other people. The last aspect is the impulse control.
In trying to explain what the condition is, Pickard (2011) looked at the psychological, philosophical and social aspects of the same. In order to bring this out more effectively, she argued that personality is the set of characteristics which make us who we are. She then goes a head to explain the various areas in which PD can affect the life of an individual. She started off by giving the life experience of Gray, an individual who lives with the condition. She argues that not only did she make other people suffer due to her condition, but also suffered as well due to her anger, fear, distrust and violence. At this point, it is worth noting that the individuals suffering from the condition tend to have different clusters. There is the Narcissistic cluster in which an individual lacks empathy, will for admiration, and develops a will to exploit other people. There is also the Histrionic aspect which makes an individual demand for attention, and can also display inappropriate sexual behavior. Lastly, there is the Borderline PD which is defined by excessive but inappropriate anger towards the self and others. It can be characterized by recklessness, impulsivity, instability in the self perception as well as relationship with others. Lastly, there is the antisocial cluster where an individual behaves in a socially unacceptable manner. They tend to break rules, lack remorse and violate their rights as well as the rights of others (Pickard, 2011).
The above characteristics lead to what is termed as the Janus-faced nature of PD. The analysis of the condition and the behaviors it produces in individuals suggest that PD can be termed as a psychiatric condition that has an aspect of morality. In the psychiatric sense, Pickard (2011) posits that the condition tends to interfere with an individual’s sense of judgment. Furthermore, its dual nature of clinical and moral features of the condition makes it hard to define where it actually falls in terms of psychiatry. This is where the philosophical aspect comes in as the cure for the condition is sought. The philosophical component has it that the clinicians are to hold the service users for the moral concept of PD without blaming them. In order to make this possible, there is a framework that differentiates blameworthiness, responsibility, and blame. This suggests that blame is avoided when this is applied to the individuals with the condition, but responsibility is not. In countering this issue, there is another argument that the people with PD might not have the ability to tell between what is wrong and what is right, and as such, the legal aspect comes in as there is the need to find out whether the people can be held responsible before the law or not. Even if the law is manipulated so as to take care of the PD patients, it has to be noted that they are quiet a diverse group and such a move would be quite generalized. Looking at these perspectives, Pickard (20110 concludes that PD is quite a challenge in the society as it has not been fully understood.
Reference
Pickard, H. (2011). What is Personality Disorder? PPP, Vol. 18(3). (Attached).
