Talk:Haltlose personality disorder

Defamatory

As a stub, this entry is obviously incomplete, but it does give the impression that modern psychiatry has not progressed very far since the days of Kraepelin more than a century ago. It describes an “individual” in the terms that a criminologist might use. It would appear that the disorder is considered merely as the product of a wilfully misdirected mind.

As it stands, the stub is defamatory. Perhaps it is hoped that the patient can be shamed into denial and subsequently be declared cured – the diagnosis is the cure - while the underlying problems remain.

The entry needs to include typical complaints with which patients present. It should also consider that the patient might actually be suffering from, and be disadvantaged by the disorder.

The German adjective haltlos (“a” pronounced as in “half”, “o” as in “horse”) describes an absence of Halt, which is obviously related to the English noun “hold”, as in “foothold”. Halt is the metaphysical property that prevents something slipping or falling, or being blown or washed away, thereby enabling it to fulfil its function or purpose. In the figurative sense it might be understood as “faith” in the wider sense, as used in the expression, “to keep the faith” (see also the song of this name by Bon Jovi), meaning that which gives one the inner strength or so-called moral fibre not just

• to not go down the road beyond pragmatism to opportunism, or, in the worst case, criminal activity,
• to resist inappropriate impulses and addiction,

but also the strength

• to keep smiling and be nice to others,
• to persevere and not be discouraged in the face of adversity,
• and, of course, to not despair and succumb to mental illness in any form.

Halt is something children need from their parents and carers to make them resilient and it is what people seek in religion and, unfortunately, in some cases, nationalism, extremism and various other –isms.

There may be a higher incidence of Haltlosigkeit among the so-called undesirable elements in society. However, it is hard to imagine that this subgroup would be capable of much more than opportunistic petty crime, in many cases attributable to youthful folly - in contrast to those with e.g. antisocial personality disorder. And it does not follow that all persons that are not blessed with Halt are potential criminals and drug addicts etc. as might be imagined from the stub. They need help, not condemnation.

The article should take these additional aspects into account in this, the 21st Century. Duncan Dolittle (talk) 00:05, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

ICD

If this is an ICD-10 disorder the corresponding ICD-10 code should be mentioned. I guess it is included in F60.8 ("others"), but I am not sure. --84.115.204.211 (talk) 19:07, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

 Done You are correct, it is included in F60.8, which is listed at Haltlose personality disorder#External links. Daask (talk) 14:11, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

• The incipit now states Haltlose personality disorder (HLPD) is an ICD-10 personality disorder... That looks to me like a possible overstatement, as it could seem to imply that it has its own specific code. Rather, it is cited within the 2021 ICD-10-CM Diagnosis Code F60.89 ("Other specific personality disorders") as one of a series of diagnoses to which this (miscellaneous) code is applicable. In practice, that would mean that if I needed to assign an ICD-10 code to a case, or cases, bearing a diagnosis of Haltlose personality disorder (for example in an epidemiological study) then I would classify it under F60.89 Other specific personality disorders. That doesn't make me think of it as an ICD-10 personality disorder. So, imo, that claim needs to be reassessed/reweighted. 86.180.70.117 (talk) 21:18, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Adler

A close reading of the Adler source makes it clear there is some overlap between his headings "2" and "3", whereas headings "4" and "5" are clearly discussing other personality disorders. I have tried to honestly represent his intentions in the 1917 journal publication, but welcome discussion if I have interpreted anything incorrectly. HaltlosePersonalityDisorder (talk) 06:04, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Some awkward reliable medical sourcing issues here

(ping @User:HaltlosePersonalityDisorder). This notable and - apparently (per ICD-10, at least?) - clinically pertinent page currently seems to ignore WP:MEDRS, Wikipedia's reliable medical sourcing guidelines, and this is a major issue here. One particular source of concern is the structural conflation of clinical claims and psychiatric history (for example, description of the disorder directly in the historical words of Adler and others, without secondary sourcing). Clearly, there is a real problem with an apparent dearth, in any language, of even *relatively* recent reliable medical sources in the clinical literature (cf Langmaack 2000 [1], Cullivan 1998 [already cited inline]). In a rapid glance at PubMed, GoogleScholar and GoogleBooks, I largely drew a blank at spotting potential MEDRS in the English language ([2]?), and few obvious candidates in other languages either; I don't know if User:Markworthen (ping :-) might be able to make any rapid suggestions, perhaps based on Psych databases I'm not able to access.

Normally, a page regarding a clinical condition would be structured broadly along the lines of WP:MEDMOS#Diseases or disorders or syndromes in such a way as to distinguish between clinical claims of current relevance (requiring MEDRS sourcing) and historical content (requiring WP:RS, but not necessarily WP:MEDRS; eg[?] PMID 31114930), as has has been done with other personality disorders currently recognized by DSM (eg Borderline personality disorder, Antisocial personality disorder, etc) or otherwise (eg Passive–aggressive personality disorder). To me, that seems problematic here, due to the apparent lack of available MEDRS.

As I find it difficult to know what to suggest in practice, I'm wondering whether (in addition to Markworthen) User:WhatamIdoing (a further ping :-) – a highly experienced WP:MED editor who has an interest in such editorial issues – might have some thoughts on this. 86.144.125.239 (talk) 16:02, 7 October 2020 (UTC)