It
would be incredibly difficult to image having to live your life
without an arm or a leg. Basic tasks become complicated and
exhaustive. Not only does it impact an individual on the physical
level, but the social implications and how a physically disabled is
viewed in our culture is not to be underestimated as well. For many,
losing an appendage would be a worst nightmare. But for some, it is
their very dream. Although it is hard to understand why, a small and
growing collection of people, organized through online forums and
social networks, a condition known as BIID or “body integrity
identity disorder” is slowly gaining attention in society. People
who have BIID all suffer from a common trait. They see some aspect of
their physical self that they want removed.
Neurologist
McGeoch at the center at the Center for Brain and Cognition at the
University of California best summarizes this alleged disorder.
According to McGeoch, suffers of BIID tend to have a disability in
brain function, specifically the right frontal lobe. This lobe is
responsible for the cognitive mapping of our physical bodies. Such a
disability could make a specific section of our our body, such as an
arm or a leg, feel abstract or as McGeoch states as surplus. This
urge is strong enough for many to take extreme acts of what some may
call self mutilation to resolve these deep and psychological
feelings.
The
entire premise of BIID can be quite disturbing and is almost
certainly not accepted in today's society. With almost certainty,
advocacy groups for the physically disabled would take serious issue
with BIID. Being an amputee from war for example yields certain
inabilities and unfortunately causes add stress on someones life. For
example, the Coalition for Iraq + Afghanistan Veterans would almost
certainly argue that a missing limb would be a legitimate disorder
whereas claiming the need and desire to remove a perfectly healthy
limb as a disorder would only cure one supposed disorder to be
replaced with a far more serious one.
BIID
is also controversial because it brings to light and challenges
commonly accepted medical ethics. For a surgeon to proceed in a
surgery, there must be a valid and reasonable point as to why such a
procedure is to be undergone. In an instance where an individual with
a perfectly healthy limb is asking to have it surgically removed
certainly flies in the face of these ethics. There is however an
argument that if a amputation is to be done on someone who suffers
BIID, it would be relatively safer and ensure the life of the patient
to a greater effect than risk for that individual to pursue methods
of amputation independently.
Although
this argument is generally not accepted in society today, it does
hold one valid point. The urges of BIID are truly deep and profound.
One such example comes to mind that truly illustrates this notion. In
the case of Josh, who was so tormented by his arm, would drive
aimlessly around with his arm outside the window hoping a to be
sideswiped. To no avail, yet determined to have his arm removed,
resorted to self surgery. Such ideas are truly graphic and the
makings of a horror film. It could be accepted that BIID is a
legitimate disorder, however such a person diagnosed would most
certainly conclude that the only cure to this disorder would be
amputation alone.
