Response to “Cutting Desire”

 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.