Emotional liability

Emotional liability is emotional instability including becoming easily emotional and experiencing uncontrollable emotions, and/or emotions that are out of proportion to circumstances. Emotions may or may not reflect what the person is feeling, and sudden outbursts of emotion may occur. Emotional instability, sometimes called emotionalism, can be the result of a personality trait, but also occurs in a number of neurological diseases including multiple sclerosis, and untreated Chronic Lyme disease.

PBA and depression

Emotional liability is different to the pseudobulbar affect (PBA), which typically involves uncontrollable or pathological laughing and crying, for example uncontrollable laughing at funerals. In PBA, emotional outbursts may be triggered by mild or neutral stimuli and they may not always reflect the person's actual feelings.

Emotional instability may sometimes be mistaken for depression.

Learn more

• Anger laughter and tears understanding emotional outbursts in MS

See also

• Depression
• Pseudobulbar affect (including uncontrollable laughing and crying)

(APA) - The main professional organization of psychiatrists and trainee psychiatrists in the United States, and the largest psychiatric organization in the world. Not to be confused with the American Psychological Association (also APA).

American Psychiatric Association (APA) - The main professional organization of psychiatrists and trainee psychiatrists in the United States, and the largest psychiatric organization in the world. Not to be confused with the American Psychological Association (also APA).

See Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.

Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) - A psychiatric reference book published by the American Psychiatric Association, often referred to as "the psychiatrist's Bible". Although the most recent version (DSM-5) purports to be the authoritative guide to the diagnosis of mental disorders, the editors of both previous versions of the manual have heavily criticized the current version due to the climate of secrecy that shrouded the development of the latest version. 69% of the people who worked on DSM-5 reported having ties to the pharmaceutical industry. Dr. Allen Frances, who headed the development of the previous version, warned of dangerous unintended consequences such as new false 'epidemics'. The British Psychological Society criticized DSM-5 diagnoses as "clearly based largely on social norms, with 'symptoms' that all rely on subjective judgements" and expressed a major concern that "clients and the general public are negatively affected by the continued and continuous medicalisation of their natural and normal responses to their experiences". A petition signed by over 13,000 mental health professionals stated that the lowered diagnostic thresholds in DSM-5, combined with entirely subjective criteria based on western social norms, would "lead to inappropriate medical treatment of vulnerable populations". The director of the US National Institute of Mental Health, Dr. Thomas R. Insel, pointed out that the diagnoses in DSM-5 had no scientific validity whatsoever. (Learn more: www.scientificamerican.com)