Failure to function adequately

• The failure to function adequately definition, sees individuals as abnormal when their behaviour suggests that they cannot cope with the ordinary demands of everyday living. We might decide that someone is not functioning adequately when they are able to maintain basic standards of nutrition and hygiene. Behaviour is also considered to be abnormal when it causes distress leading to one FFA. E.g. disrupting the ability to work or maintain interpersonal relationships. Rosenhan and Seligman proposed some signs that can be used to determine when someone is not coping.
• These include: when a person no longer conforms to standard interpersonal rules e.g. eye contact, when one experiences severe distress and when one's behaviour becomes dangerous towards themselves/others and irrational. An example of someone who could be not coping according to this definition is where you wash your hands so frequently to keep them clean that you are late for work. If this happens a lot you are fired. So you cannot maintain a job which is part of everyday living. So you are classed as abnormal as you could be suffering from an anxiety disorder such as OCD.
• Clinicians may use tools such as the Global Assessment of Functioning scale to assess the extent to which one is failing to function.
• There are some strengths of using the FFA definition to assess abnormality as it takes into consideration the subjective experience of the individual. For example, whilst it may not be an entirely satisfactory approach because it may be difficult to assess distress, the definition acknowledges that the experience of the patient is important. This clearly is a strength of the definition as it canbe a useful criterion for assessing abnormality and subsequently access to treatment for patients who may be suffering.
• Continuing strength: taking into account the subjective experience of the individual What's more, clinical studies from the Royal College of Psychiatrists have shown that when involving patients in their diagnosis as much as possible, recovery is aided. Thus this suggests that the definition is useful as it can be used to improve the well-being of patients.
• However, a major limitation of this definition is that Psychopaths can cause great harm and yet still appear normal. For example H. Shipman an English doctor murdered approximately 215 of his patients over 23 years, but seemed to be a respectable doctor as he: maintained a job, personal hygiene and interpersonal relationships as he was married. Whilst he was clearly abnormal, he did not display any features of the criteria for FFA and so according to this definition he would seem normal.
• Continue weakness: psychopaths can cause great harm and still appear normal This clearly is a weakness of the definition as this behaviour must be considered abnormal as it has been detrimental towards society. So as the FFA definition would argue otherwise, it does not adequately encompass all types of abnormality and so is not a completely valid explanation for abnormality.