John Wright Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 PTSD has a chequered history as a head of claim. It used to be called nervous shock and was very difficult to prove. It’s pretty mainstream now. Better diagnostic criteria. I sit on the Criminal Injuries Compensation Committee. Even we have been making PTSD awards for over 25+ years. But in life I come across lots of people claiming they have PTSD. Most don’t have the necessary diagnostic criteria. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrighty Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 9 minutes ago, John Wright said: But in life I come across lots of people claiming they have PTSD. Most don’t have the necessary diagnostic criteria. Don’t they even look them up? Like most psychiatric diagnoses you can’t prove it with a blood test or a scan. I’ve even heard of people being coached what to say. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred the shred Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 It has become a popular condition, I mean no disrespect to anyone who has been diagnosed with it but I know someone who has a psychiatric illness and has been diagnosed with this after countless tests etc with no answers it seems this is the end game that has been suggested. Firstly it was thought to be a muscle wasting condition but this has now been ruled out after extensive tests so the diagnosis has moved towards a psychiatric cause. It seems to be a diagnosis given when all else fails. A very sad and frustrating position for the sufferer. I don’t profess to know anything regarding the medical side of this situation just socially involved with the sufferer who is going downhill fast it is very sad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 21 minutes ago, wrighty said: Don’t they even look them up? Like most psychiatric diagnoses you can’t prove it with a blood test or a scan. I’ve even heard of people being coached what to say. It’s the most common thing I’m told as duty advocate either custody or court. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gizo Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 On 7/14/2024 at 9:47 AM, Max Power said: You’re so wrong on so many points there that it’s hardly worth trying to convince you, you’re completely sold on anything which supports your agenda and not interested in the bigger picture. What’s the bigger picture? Lumpy carpets? Lying? come on then tell me why the inquiry was a sham? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gizo Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 On 7/14/2024 at 5:06 PM, Banker said: You’re like Courtney heading with all your conspiracy theories!! Read the inquiry. Prick 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Ram Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 14 minutes ago, Gizo said: Read the inquiry. Prick Is that acceptable posting on here? It’s not very mature or intelligent! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gizo Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 Just now, Roger Ram said: Is that acceptable posting on here? It’s not very mature or intelligent! Piss off Dave. Will that do? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 1 hour ago, Roger Ram said: Is that acceptable posting on here? It’s not very mature or intelligent! so it fits right in then , what's the problem.? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Ram Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 13 minutes ago, WTF said: so it fits right in then , what's the problem.? Rule 2 ” No obscenities, no defamation, no tasteless or otherwise unpleasant or injurious posts and no posts which break either the civil or criminal law are allowed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 3 minutes ago, Roger Ram said: Rule 2 ” No obscenities, no defamation, no tasteless or otherwise unpleasant or injurious posts and no posts which break either the civil or criminal law are allowed. you've just invented that haven't you you cheeky little scamp you , that would make 99.9% of the current posts against the rules. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarndyce Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 3 minutes ago, Roger Ram said: 17 minutes ago, WTF said: so it fits right in then , what's the problem.? Rule 2 ” No obscenities, no defamation, no tasteless or otherwise unpleasant or injurious posts and no posts which break either the civil or criminal law are allowed. Note this in your diaries! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Ram Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 4 minutes ago, WTF said: you've just invented that haven't you you cheeky little scamp you , that would make 99.9% of the current posts against the rules. Nope. Its in the T&c’s Lets see if the mods are big enough to enforce their own rules Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 "Miss, miss, Gizo was mean to me" Pathetic. 2 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Voice of Reason Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 8 minutes ago, Roger Ram said: Nope. Its in the T&c’s Lets see if the mods are big enough to enforce their own rules Grow up dickhead 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.