Where is the Line Drawn?

The readings for this week have made me reflect a lot on the lens through which I view so called “waste” and the societal forces that shape these impressions that I have. One of the main things that has stuck with me from the readings on ‘hoarding’ was how loosely defined it was, while also being classified as a “disorder”. Even in the DSM, regardless of the manual’s well established scientific standing, ‘hoarding disorder’ is defined very nebulously. It describes the ‘disorder’ primarily in the terms of what it is not and in very subjective terminology. It is explicitly stated multiple times that ‘hoarding disorder’ can only be a diagnosis once other possible causes of this behavior, such as OCD, brain injury, or major depressive disorder, are ruled out. While I do not deny that cases such as the Collyer brothers are very extreme and likey deserve some kind of label, my issue lies in how these labels are determined. As we discussed in class, a key term relating to this diagnosis is “value”. Value has many different meanings and while monetary value is the most common, individuals can also value items for their uses, sentimentality, or even aestetic properties. Who can say what items have value to another person? And even further, who determines when a collection exceeds its bounds and “clutter[s] active living areas”? I would argue that my sports jersey collection that I refuse to get rid of clutters my closet and impedes its function. Where is the line drawn? Many people are framed as mentally ill, or ‘disordered’, simply for not fitting the societal definition of what is an appriate amount of possesions to have.