I am suggesting to abolish the term "Hoarding" for the following reasons -
* it represents the stigma and the bias of the mainstream framework, whether in clinical or coloquial use
** authors ( Frost et al ) played a large role in popularizing, refining and formalizing its continued use as such
** they themselves played a part in describing and defining it - which will also be demonstrated largely bogus
** yet, they admit that it is stigmatizing in some of their books ( BIT )
** yet, despite this, they continue using it full-steam, including in the very same books, in different combinations
** they could have done something about it - create or find a more neutral and specific term - but they didn't
*** e.g. people with hoarding problems, problems with hoarding, your hoarding problem - these are all the same thing
** = hypocricy ( also a point of criticism )
* it is ambiguous - on one hand, there is an attempt - an I only say attempt - to rigourously define it in DSM-5 - however,
** definition is, on closer inspection, so ambiguous, subjective value judgement, and riddled with hard to prove causation, that one can drive a truck through it
** it is, in practice, very loosely applied - including in the "foundational" books by Frost et al. - no one bothers to demonstrate applicability
** usually, "hoarding" is pronounced simply on the basis of any or all of these being excessive or unusual, apparently abnormal - acquisition, retention
Instead, I am using, and proposing to use, the more specific, neutral, non-stigmatizing terms without any indication of pathology or underlying causes -
* "Keeper" / "Keeping" - for the mechanical fact of keeping, especially apparently unusual / excessive items, whether or not specifically intentional or conscious
* "dysfunction in possessions" - for that specific mechanical condition