Parents Neglect - D&D named.....

[EvilPheemy]

Society has always needed a scapegoat to explain abhorrent behavior. It's a natural reaction because the vast majority of people do not neglect their infant children to the point of near-death (or murder their peers in cold blood, blow up office buildings, or any number of sensational, headline-creating crimes that our media pushes in our collective faces 24/7). Our first reaction is to ask the question "why?", and especially in cases like this, the answer is far too deep and complex to present in a two minute news clip, or a 10 paragraph story. Society just wants to be reassured that "it won't happen to *us*".

Thus, the fringe hobbies come out to the front. "They were obsessed with 'Dungeons and Dragons'", or violent video games, or the goth scene". Just insert anything that can be pointed at, and easily stereotyped. Then the "why" ceases to be a complicated and deep subject. No one has to worry that they're darling little children, or themselves might have an issue, all the "average" person needs to do is avoid the strange little activity pointed out in the article or story.

 

[der_kluge]

Wow.

On a related note, I'm glad Crothian doesn't have any children.


/I kid, I kid.

 

[Ferret]

Lol!

I was reading a new scientist article about conspiracies, and some of the logic there applies here. Major effect, major cause. People are happier to hear it was caused by some strange 'thing' that they can stay away from than if the people involved were 'normal'.

Also another phrase to throw in for good measure: Moral panic.

 

[Thurbane]

Just the usual case of certain elements of the media and society looking for a quick-fix scapegoat, instead of just chalking it up to good old fashioned bad parenting...

 

[Tal Rasha]

So, any of you guys correcting doctors' and researchers' "mistakes" actually doctors, psychologists or researchers in addiction and/or addictive personalities? Heck, I'd settle for a social worker or a psychology minor with an emphasis in brain and behavior over all this wagon circling.

Some behaviors are more potentially addictive than other behaviors, just like some chemical substances are more potentially addictive than other chemical substances. It has nothing to do with you, it has nothing to do with a geek hating culture ignoring jocks and picking on geeks, it has nothing to do with 80's grandstanding social campaigners and a stigma against D&D. It has to do with what professional expereince and research actually shows, as opposed to what you would like to think it true.

You see, what comes between a paper or study and general acceptance is public skepticism. I believe it is a good, healthy thing. The media often seeks out the sensational. Even if it doesn't, it may not be able to accurately investigate and report all facts. Studies may be biased. They may be supported by hidden interests. They might have inappropriate data sets, or their results might be wrongly interpreted. Read, for example, this article . Previous study shows that "for each hour spent gaming during the week, the time that boys spent reading dropped by 30 percent". Carefully examining the details shows that "This would be problematic except for the fact that boys only spent an average of eight minutes reading on a typical weekday." As long as we're not dealing with rock hard science (and this is rare indeed, even mathematics isn't what it once was), I think it wise to doubt what scientists and doctors say, at least for a while.

Another point is that more and more things tend to be categorized as diseases or afflictions, when in fact they might not be (IMHO). Perhaps the most disturbing thing is that I have heard, a while back, of a drug one could take in order to become "more sociable". This, if true, I find disturbing.

And "addicition" is a strong word. Drugs, cigarettes, alcohol? Sure. Sex, social status, money? Maybe. Video games, TV, rock music? Hmmm...

 

[Dragon-Slayer]

What's next??

I'm gonna get my doctor to write to my boss explaining how I'm addicted to 'not working', have me signed off indefinatly, and IF I'm lucky, I'll get a fat giro from the government.

When Doctors - a.k.a Highly Educated people - come out with like that, it's kinda worrying, unless of course the investigation was headed by DR Bush.... Then it makes perfect sense! lol

Not to sidetrack too much, but Dr. Clinton has already provided this for you, FMLA. Where I work 25%-30% of people do not show up on a daily basis, many for months at a time, and are all federally protected. One clever lad has severe hypoglycemia AND diabetes at the SAME TIME, I haven't seen him for six months, he gets a paycheck and just needs to call in at work once a week. He was off the previous six months for strep throat. He works about four weeks a year and gets full pay.

Back on topic, we need to get stories out there that put a positive spin on our hobby. Thanks to Mr. Gygax I played AD&D which expanded my vocabulary, helped me to learn to work well with others and socialize and stay off of drugs through my teenage years and I am sure I am not the only one who has seen some benefit from gaming.

 

[Cabled]

I'm going to pipe up here for a moment. As someone who lived and breathed behavior and addiction for ten years and still volunteers at schools and clinics around the area, I want to touch on a couple points people have brought up.

The first is about jail, whether it's appropriate or not. Whether the game IS the addiction or simply a factor within an addiction here is irrelevant to this. By its very nature, a true addiction cannot be fought by the addict. It requires outside intervention. So if this is NOT an addiction, they were willfully negligent and deserve jail. If it IS an addiction, experience has taught me (unfortunately) that the best and nearly only way to force those people to get the therapy they need, and remain in therapy and treatment for a meaningful length of time, is to incarcerate them to enforce it. MOST (and that is capital most) people that need help in this manner will not seek it of thier own cognizance.

The second is about whether (video) games are addictive in thier own right. The simple and true professional answer right now is that we do not know. Real research, the kind that is peer reviewed ad infinitum, replicated, cross referenced, and backup up to the Nth degree is still too sparse to have a definite conclusion. We simply haven't had the tools to study and begin to understand an addiction like this for long enough. Addictions based on introduced chemicals like alcohol are easier to study, it's closer to chemistry. Addictions based purely on stimulus are much more difficult (and expensive) to study, and most of the data to this point is anecdotal, which makes for an all right starting point, if viewed from a long ways away, and at a sideways angle, but nothing more than that. Anecdotal evidence cannot seperate a symptom from a cause.

 

[Arkhandus]

etc, etc....

So, any of you guys correcting doctors' and researchers' "mistakes" actually doctors, psychologists or researchers in addiction and/or addictive personalities? Heck, I'd settle for a social worker or a psychology minor with an emphasis in brain and behavior over all this wagon circling.

Actually, my grandfather is a psychologist who specializes in rehabillitating addicts. He's been a social worker for at least a decade now, maybe two. He was the first person to introduce me to video games when I was a kid, and I'd play his Atari pretty often back then. One of the main kinds of X-Mas gifts I'd received over the years from him as a kid was new video games and computer games (the other main kind was Legos, heh).

He's never said anything bad of video games or computer games, and his favorite neighbor plays video games (and builds computers for a living). He's a very active reader of psych and social worker material, and the smartest person I know (granted, I don't know a lot of people). And he's not once said anything about video games being addictive or the like, though I'd expect him to say something if he worried I might be addicted to video games. He knows well enough that I spend a lot of time playing video/computer games.


But I'm certainly not addicted to video games, else there wouldn't be these long stretches of months in which I hardly play any video/computer games at all. And I wouldn't have taken every chance to hang out with friends as a kid, as opposed to spending all free time with video games. Nowadays I play them only when I'm really bored, and I've never had an obsession with video games.

Even in my most dedicated gaming sessions I'd leave the room every few hours or so to eat, drink, or got to the bathroom, and to do whatever chores my parents demanded of me (and of course to try getting precious, precious sleep despite my insomnia). And I'd still usually spend a few hours each of those days on doing other stuff, before deciding to start up the game again. And that kind of gaming streak I'd only do once in a while, with a new game (which would usually last for about a week or a bit less).

Ergo, I'm fairly certain that video games are not addictive in and of themselves. I've occasionally spent a month playing games for some 8 to 12 hours a day, but never had any trouble putting the games away and taking care of my schoolwork (anyway, I'd only spend that much time gaming when I wasn't in school). None of my friends have ever had a problem with that either, and they were at least as video-game-loving as I was.

Only people with a psychological predisposition toward addiction, and insufficient self-control, are at any potential risk of addiction to video/computer games.

 

[Moon-Lancer]

is it possible that d&d was used as a blanket term? like could this have been wow?

 

[Steel_Wind]

is it possible that d&d was used as a blanket term? like could this have been wow?

It's possible I suppose. I took the phrase to mean D&D Online.