failure to function

Question 1

when is somone categorised as abnormal according to failure to function

Answer 1

• they can not cope with demands of everyday life
• behaviour is considered maladaptive, irrational or dangerous
• their behaviour causes distress ot themselevs or others

Question 2

how to apply the definition of failure to function in questions

Answer 2

go to the extreme eg. Someone might get fired, their relationships fall apart so thta we can argue they can’t cope with everyday living

Question 3

strengths of failure to function

Answer 3

• attempts to include the subjective experience of the individual - may not be an entirely satisfactory approach because it is difficult to assess distress, but the definition acknowledges that the experience of the patient is important, therefore captures the experience of many who need help, Therefore it seems to be a useful way of assessing abnormality by taking into account the person’s subjective experiences

Question 4

explain how its hard to judge distress is a weakness of failure to function

Answer 4

• hard to judge if someone is in distress or causing someone else distress
• Some patients may say that they are distressed but may not be judged as suffering
• there are methods to make this assesssment subjective eg Global Assessment of Functioning Scale
• However, the principle remains that someone (e.g. a psychiatrist) has the right to make this judgement.
• judgements are subjective and so mean that people who would benefit from help may not get it as they are not classed as abnormal and vice versa
• means the definition’s use may lack reliability and so it should only be used in combination with other definitions

Question 4

explain how cultural relatvism is a weakness of failure to function

Answer 4

• In some cultures (and sub-cultures within the UK), women are not expected to maintain a job, or people are expected to go without food for significant periods of time
• Using the definition, such people would be classified as abnormal because their cultural norms differ from our own
• may explain why lower-class and non-white patients are more often classified as abnormal; their lifestyles are different from the dominant culture and this may lead to a judgement of failing to function adequately
• definition lacks externa validity so shouldn’t be used outside the culture it was created in without caution
• creates problems for people from one culture living within another culture group as their behaviour may be classed as coping with everyday living in their own culture, but not coping with everyday living in the culture in which they are now living
• therefore psychologists must be sensitive to such cultural differences when defining abnormality

Question 4

explain how psychopaths is a weakness of failure to function

Answer 4

• have a dangerous personality disorder and cause great harm yet still appear normal
• harold shipman killed at least 215 patients over 23 years yet still seemed to be a respectable doctor
• maintained a job, personal hygiene, interpersonal relationship
• He was abnormal, but didn’t display features of functioning inadequately and so would be classed as normal according to this definition
• suggests the definition lacks validity because it is not able to measure what it intends to measure - doesn’t always lead to a definition of abnormality (decide someone is mentally ill) when it should

Question 4

weaknesses of using failure to function

Answer 4

• psycopaths
• cultural relativism
• hard to judge distress