As a community devoted to advancing the cause of true and
current awareness surrounding eating disorders it is always frustrating to read
articles which perpetuate outdated myths and stereotypes.
There are those who think calling out such pieces is unfair
and that due to the lack of 100% consensus in the field on certain points,
considerable latitude should be given, especially pieces related to
environmental influence. Others wonder
why make a big deal out of it—if you don’t like it, move along.
The administrative team of IEDAction believes that
perpetuating societal misunderstanding of eating disorders as having to do with
choice or vanity or being caused by family dysfunction is a damaging practice
with far-reaching implications.
Research shows that people—and politicians and governmental
research funding decision makers are
people—are more likely to support spending money spent on disorders they don’t
perceive as being caused by modifiable environmental factors. Don’t want lung
cancer? Don’t smoke. Don’t want your kids to have an eating disorder? Don’t be
a dysfunctional family. Don’t expect taxpayers to save you from your own folly.
IED performs a watchdog/rabble rouser function at times – alert
for opportunities to push back on careless or false “awareness” pieces. Today we read a piece we feel typifies the
casual approach to disseminating relevant and up-to-date information; reading
such a piece is doubly painful when it is posted on a site that generally
provides solid information. This post on the blog at Eating Disorder Hope
titled, “Family
Dynamics at the Dinner Table” is one such piece:
The qualifiers “may” and “some” do not excuse that this
piece is a rehash and mish-mash of outdated research findings and beliefs
lacking in citations and written by someone whose Internet footprint does not
show specialized training in eating disorders.
The bottom line is current research, whose findings are
agreed upon by most top eating disorder clinical and advocacy groups, in the
Academy of Eating Disorders 9 Truths about Eating Disorders, shows eating
disorders to be a complex interplay of genetics, biology
and environment. As the AED 9 Truths affirms, that there is an environmental
influence in no way means “families cause eating disorders.” We DO know that early intervention and prompt access to evidence-based treatment is the best hope for a fully, lifelong recovery from an eating disorder.
Are there families with the issues outlined in this post who
have kids with eating disorders? Without a doubt. Are there families with the issues outlined
in this post who have kids without eating disorders? Yes, and they are by far
the larger number. Might families who have been dealing with a sick child with inadequate knowledge and resources (more common than not) become dysfunctional? Assuredly so. To portray families of kids with eating disorders as
COMMONLY having these issues is a gross injustice to both those families and to
those who receive treatment delivered under such antiquated beliefs.
One of our own administrators, Julia Fuentes, who developed
her eating disorder after the negative energy balance that resulted from
chemotherapy for osteosarcoma and spent years suffering under treatment that
expected her to identify the “underlying cause” to her eating disorder says,
“The talk about attention seeking annoys me because I can promise that if
attention was all I wanted I could have found a thousand more productive ways
to get attention. It all comes down to neurobiology—that’s the missing piece.”
Celia Robicheau, the mother of a young daughter in recovery
with a master’s in counseling psychology and a certificate of advanced graduate
studied in mental health, summarizes the feelings of many: “I think family
dynamics may result in many “messy” interactions, but they don’t cause eating
disorders, bipolar or schizophrenia and when these type-of unscientific,
uneducated, ‘feelpinion’, myth-perpetuating articles are shared by reputable
sites, we are fighting an uphill battle against those who purport to help us.
We have expressed to Eating Disorder Hope in the past, and
want to reiterate that message, before posting a piece ask these questions:
1) Does recent research support this?
2) Does it reinforce outdated stereotypes and myths?
3) Does this help families and those affected?
4) Might this hurt those affected?
Our opinion is this piece fails all tests; we once again ask
Eating Disorder Hope to follow an editorial policy that doesn’t stand behind a
disclaimer, but one that makes EDH a valued partner in saving both the lives
and reducing the suffering of those affected by eating disorders.
