My senior is presenting a case for case conference. From it, I have to ask a simple question focusing on phenomenology and psychopathology. I will send it here:

I'm ready to help you formulate a sharp question on phenomenology and psychopathology. Please go ahead and share the case!

Roshan Poudel, 27 years, male, unmarried, MBS, student, hindu, Brahmin, Hemja, pokhara(P), Source of Referral : for better treatment Informant- 1. Patient himself​ 2 Mrs Shanti Poudel,48 years female, mother of patient, homemaker, primary caretaker, knows about the patient, actively involved in patient treatment 3.Mr Krishna Prasad Poudel, 51 years ,male,SLC, hardware shopowner , father of patient, knows about the patient, actively involve in patient treatment Adequacy: Adequate Reliability: Reliable Presenting Complaints: According to patient: abdominal pain According to patient party: Abdominal pain since 3 years Decreased food intake and weight loss since 3 years Suspiciousness since 1 yr Decreased interaction since 2 weeks History of presenting illness: Total duration of illness: 1 years Onset: insidious Course: Continuous Progression: increasing since 2 weeks prior to presentation Ppt. factor: not obvious The patient was in his usual state of health when he developed pain abdomen for past 3 years in the epigastric region, intermittent , described as sensation of fullness and twisting of abdomen as well as sensation of something being stuck in his abdomen after eating food immediately . The pain is mild to moderate in intensity and aggravated by increased food intake , he reports that consuming large amount of food produces abdominal fullness and burning like sensation where as if he takes lesser amounts there is no pain . As a result patient has adopted fixed decreased pattern of food as a means of avoiding the discomfort . There was no fever, vomiting, loose stools, or yellowish discoloration of the body or difficulty in swallowing . Patient does not attribute decreased food intake to food being mixed with poison or restricting food intake for weight / body figure issues. Patient does not attribute his pain abdomen to foreign body or some external agaency or organs being damaged . Patient does not have suspiciousness that abdominal pain is due to someone trying to harm him. there is also no history sensation of insect or other organism crawling in his abdomen. Patient also has associated weight loss in relation to abdominal pain and decrease food intake. Patient weight was about 50 kg before illness but after illness it has decreased significantly now 37 kg . Intially weight loss was gradual but Patient weight significantly reduced 2 weeks prior to presentation according to informant. Patient is not concerned of weight loss as patient says that weight loss is due to his reduced food intake not deliberate calorie restriction or disinterest in food items. Patient has no fear of weight gain , has no preoccupation with his body size and shape. There has been no history of eating large amount of foods, no fasting for weight control and no self vomiting. Patient also has no fear of choking or vomiting and does not have problem with food color, smell. After admission patient abdominal pain has decreased and food intake has increased. Suspiciousness since 1 yr Patient developed suspiciousness towards neighbour , who is involved in metal-welding work. Noises from this work made the patient fearful, and he repeatedly told his mother that the neighbour was trying to kill them.. According to patient it started after the neighbour started to park his bike in the area of vicinity of the patients shop. Patient then developed thought that the neighbour was intentionally doing this on purpose to disturb them. Patient also felt that neighbour was disturbing them by producing the sound by hitting the rod and fence. Patient felt fearful and did not feel safe . He would tell to his family why he is giving us torture by disturbing us . Then the suspiciousness increased when his parents was away for 1 month , patient felt threat that the neighbour could do harm to his younger brother and sister , patient at one occasion hit the fence with his fist in respond to anger and frustration he had due to his belief that the neighbour was against and disturbing on purpose , he also hit to test if the neighbour would respond , the neighbour did not respond and his father told him what are you doing, there is no need to do that, patoent did not say anything. Patient had also preoccupied with the belief that his neigbours posed threat to him and his family. According to patient he had sleep disturbance and he also could not focus on study . Patient also avoided the neighbour and he would laso tell bis family member to not go near the neighbours shop as he might harm them. This belief was held with strong conviction and he told he was 100 percent sure that his neighbour was his enemy . Patient had also suspiciousness that his neighbour was talking bad about him and his family. after talking with his brother about this, his brother told he did not fear the neighbour and told it was wrong belief of patient to think that way , patient thought that I was worrying about my family safety but they all say I had false belief so he felt that he may have interpreted in wrong away and now he belief that his neighbour could have produced sound while doing the work and say he is 50 -50 on this belief. Hearing voices since 4 months : According to patient would hear voices unheard by others since about 4 months , duration he is not sure . The voices were of multiple people, some familiar voice and some unfamiliar of adult, predominantly male, and were experienced as originating from outside, at a perceived distance of approximately 50 meters and, at times, closer. He described at least two distinguishable voices with content about him "Yesle jandaina" ("He doesn't know anything") and "Kei pani garna sakdaina" ("He can't do anything") and other voices supporting that comments. He would actively attempt to interpret the meaning of these voices but he would not give example. Patient would be fearful of voice , he would not clarify if it would be most time of the day or daily . The voices would not command him and he thought it was true voice. When asked if this present at hospital he told he would not make any judgement and did not give yes or no answer also. According to informant the have not notice him and patient has not told about the voices. Decreased interaction since 2 weeks : Approximately 10 days prior to presentation, the patient's interaction with family members progressively declined. He initially began speaking less than his usual baseline, describing a sensation of his voice being "stuck in his throat" with associated difficulty speaking; his responses during this period were reduced in amount, delayed in onset, and monotonous in quality, with minimal spontaneous interaction. Over the subsequent 4–5 days, patient did not speak at all , at which point he stopped verbally responding altogether, though he continued to make eye contact when spoken to. During this period, he was also noted to adopt and maintain specific posture . He would remain in this position for hours without spontaneous change. Since 3 days prior to presentation Patient would also not eat at all , patient mother had to forcefully put the food in mouth but he would not swallow and would keep food in mouth . He had an episode of urinary retention, unable to void urine for 3 days; a Foley's catheter was inserted at another centre. However there was no h/o rigidity of body,repeating actions seen or words heard. Negative history: No history of traumatic brain injury in the past, prolonged fever, no h/o not recognizing family members, not being aware of one’s surroundings, no h/o prolonged diarrhea , LOC, problems with vision, sensation or balance, rashes, joint or muscle pain, no h/o persistent sad mood, deacrease interest , guilt or feeling of hopelessness and worthlessness no h/o excessive talkativeness, over familiarity, persistent elevated or irritable mood, great ideas regarding self No history of seeing others unseen by others no h/o hearing own thoughts out loud, thoughts being withdrawn, broadcasted or inserted no h/o feelings of being under control of foreign agency, Biological functions: Sleep: patient used to sleep at around 9 pm and used to wake up at 5 am. There was no history of difficulty initiating, maintaining sleep or snoring during the sleep prior to the illness. The patient would have disturbed sleep occasional 12 times per month . Appetite: Patient used to take 2 major and 1 minor non vegetarian meals. . Patient has been on vegetarian diet since 1.5 years after he developed jaundice. After start of illness his appetite has decreased. Weight loss/gain: significant weight loss from 45 kg to 37 kg B/B: decreased urine output and urinary retention ; constipation Libido: No changes in libido noted. Personal care: Patient used to bath 2 times per week and would change his clothes, would brush his teeth regularly. He would comb his hair regularly and would trim his nails, cut his beard and moustasche as necessary. Work performances: patient used to help in household chores and would also assist in shop . Personality changes: Couldn’t be commented on Treatment history: prior The patient was consulted at another centre for decreased responsiveness and urinary retention. A Foley's catheter was inserted there, and he was subsequently referred to this centre for psychiatric evaluation. Patient had not received any psychiatric medication prior to presentation in our hospital. Patient was evaluated at ER of TUTH, psychiatric consultation was done and Lorazepam 2 mg was started and patient was admitted in psychiatry ward. After admission patient was .gastro consulatation was done for abdominal pain and they advise for UGI endoscopy and USG. Dietary consulation was done for nutritional deficiency. Neuro consulatation was done . Now patient is under Lorazepam 2 mg po tds, olanzapine 7.5 mg /day, Inj vitamin B12, Vit D , Thiamine, lactulose, Triple therapy regimen for erosive gastritis pantoprazole 40 mg bd, amoxicillin 1 gm bd and clarithromycin 500 mg bd. Patient has improved with improvement noticed in terms of increased interaction , increased appetite and food inatke, movement of body parts. Past history: According to patient informant , patient would not go to other toilet and would hold urine and do at home. Patient also would not eat at other place and would tell I have eaten at my house already. This was noticed by parents when he was about 6 years of age . According to patient he would have difficulty in outside of his home, he would have difficulty in eating at other place as he would feel shy and he would be fearful if others will judge him . Patient would have also difficulty in speaking in public or in crowd. In school patient would also have difficulty talking with friends, he would have difficulty in initiating conversation . He would also not eat food with friends. He attributes to being shy and having fearful that his friends might judge him differently in negative way like feeling humiliated. According to patient this happened during most of his childhood days upto now and the symptoms would be increased in social situations and would decrease at home or when he is alone. When patient would be exposed to the certain situation like speaking in class, playing football initially he would have intense fearfulness with increased sense of heat beat and after repeated exposure his symptoms would decrease. According to patient this has affected the patient's ability to establish and maintain friendships and has interfered with important functional activities, such as attending job interviews despite a desire to do so When patient was 8 years of age patient was found to have difference in kidney size , Right kidney was increased in size and diagnosed to have mild hydronephrosis, after 1 year both the kidney size was normal Diagnosed to have Gastritis since 3 years with PPI prescribed for 1 month initially then on intermittent basis Jaundice

Reading File
Finding Sources
Finding Sources
Finding Sources
Reading File
Reading File
Finding Sources
Finding Sources
Finding Sources
Reading File
Reading File
I now have exactly what I need. Here is the question, with the reasoning behind why it's a strong one:

Suggested Question for Case Conference

"The patient hears multiple voices that say 'Yesle jandaina' and 'Kei pani garna sakdaina' - voices that comment about him using the third person. How would you classify this type of auditory hallucination phenomenologically, and does this fit the criteria for a Schneiderian First-Rank Symptom?"

Why this is a sharp, focused question

What it targets:
The voices in this case are a textbook example of third-person auditory hallucinations with running commentary - one of the three Schneiderian First-Rank Symptoms (FRS) of schizophrenia. Specifically:
Schneider's FRS (Auditory)This patient
Audible thoughts (voices speaking the patient's thoughts aloud)No
Voices giving a running commentary on the patient's actionsYes - "He doesn't know anything," "He can't do anything"
Two or more voices arguing about the patient in the third personPossibly - "multiple voices, some supporting the comments"
The voices refer to the patient as "he" (third person) rather than addressing him directly as "you" - this is the phenomenological key. Direct address (second person) is not a FRS; third-person commentary is.
(Kaplan & Sadock's Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry defines this as: "voices that give a running commentary on the patient's actions" and "hearing two or more voices arguing with each other, often about the patient, who is referred to in the third person.")

Why it's discussion-worthy

It invites the presenter to distinguish:
  1. Second-person vs. third-person voices - a critical phenomenological distinction
  2. Running commentary vs. command hallucinations - no commands here
  3. Whether FRS retain diagnostic specificity - DSM-5 no longer privileges them as it once did, though they remain phenomenologically significant
  4. The fact that the patient hedged answering whether voices are present in hospital opens a secondary discussion about insight and partial awareness of illness
This is a tight, one-question focus that will generate a rich phenomenological discussion without straying into management or diagnosis - exactly right for a case conference question.

Can commanding auditory hallucination be called second person hallucination

Finding Sources
Finding Sources
Reading File
Yes - command hallucinations can correctly be called second-person hallucinations, but with an important nuance:

The Short Answer

Command hallucinations are typically second-person - but second-person is a grammatical/phenomenological classification, while command is a classification by content/function. They overlap heavily but are not identical terms.

The Breakdown

Grammatical person in auditory hallucinations

PersonFormExampleClinical association
First person"I...""I am going to hurt you"Less common
Second person"You...""You are worthless," "You must kill him"Direct address - includes commands, insults, instructions
Third person"He/She/They...""He doesn't know anything"Schneiderian FRS - commentary, voices arguing

Command hallucinations

These are classified by their imperative content - they instruct or order the patient to do something. The classic form is second person: "You should jump," "Kill yourself," "Don't take your medication."
However, textbooks (including Kaplan & Sadock) describe command hallucinations primarily by their functional impact and compliance risk, not by grammatical person. A command could theoretically be framed in other ways, but in clinical practice they are overwhelmingly second-person.

The Key Distinction to Remember

Classification axisTermBased on
GrammaticalSecond-personWho the voice addresses ("you")
FunctionalCommandWhat the voice does (instructs/orders)
So: all command hallucinations are second-person, but not all second-person hallucinations are commands. A voice saying "You are a failure" is second-person but not a command - it is a critical/derogatory hallucination.
This is why in the case you presented, the voices saying "Yesle jandaina" ("He doesn't know") and "Kei pani garna sakdaina" ("He can't do anything") are:
  • Third-person (grammatically) - Schneiderian FRS
  • Commentary type (functionally) - not commands
  • Derogatory in content - which, as Kaplan & Sadock notes, is typical of mood-neutral to negative-toned voices in schizophrenia
(Kaplan & Sadock's Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry, p. 3552-3553)

Another question

Go ahead, send it over!

No no give another psychopathology question I can ask

Finding Sources
Finding Sources
Finding Sources
Finding Sources
Finding Sources
Finding Sources
Here are three alternative psychopathology questions from the same case, each targeting a different phenomenon:

Option 1 - The Delusion Question (Best for discussion)

"The patient initially held his belief about the neighbour with 100% conviction, but after his brother challenged it, he shifted to 50-50. Phenomenologically, what does this tell us about the nature of this belief - was it a true delusion, an overvalued idea, or something else?"
Why it's good: A true delusion is classically fixed, unshakeable, and not amenable to counter-argument. This patient's belief shifted after family confrontation - which raises the question of whether it was a delusion proper, an overvalued idea, or a delusion with developing insight. It also opens discussion on the spectrum: delusion → partial delusion → overvalued idea → obsession.

Option 2 - The Catatonia Question (Best for clinical phenomenology)

"The patient stopped speaking, then stopped eating but held food in his mouth without swallowing, and maintained fixed postures for hours. How do you distinguish between mutism and negativism as catatonic signs, and which of the two does retaining food in the mouth represent?"
Why it's good: These are two distinct catatonic signs that trainees often conflate. Mutism is simply absence of speech. Negativism is active resistance to instructions or stimuli (passive negativism = not doing what is asked; active negativism = doing the opposite). Holding food in the mouth without swallowing is a form of passive negativism - not mutism. This is a sharp, precise phenomenological distinction.

Option 3 - The Voice Awareness Question (More reflective/philosophical)

"When asked whether the voices were present in the hospital, the patient refused to answer yes or no. What does this type of response tell us about the patient's insight into his hallucinations, and how is this different from denial?"
Why it's good: It targets insight into psychotic symptoms - the patient is neither denying nor confirming. This may represent partial awareness, fear of stigma, or a form of double bookkeeping (knowing the experience is odd but not fully labelling it as abnormal). Distinguishing this from outright denial or full insight is a nuanced psychopathology discussion.

My pick for the sharpest question: Option 2 - the mutism vs. negativism distinction around food retention. It is precise, answerable, and very few trainees know the difference off the top of their head.

Can I ask about what psychopathology could explain not swallowing food and hearing voices

Finding Sources
Finding Sources
Finding Sources
Finding Sources
Finding Sources
Reading File
Reading File
Reading File
Reading File
This is actually a very smart question to ask - but you need to frame it carefully, because the honest phenomenological answer is that these two symptoms likely have different explanations. Here is exactly how to ask it and what to expect:

The Question

"The patient was not swallowing food placed in his mouth. Could this be explained by his auditory hallucinations - for example, a command not to swallow - or is there a more parsimonious catatonic explanation? How do you differentiate between these two mechanisms at the bedside?"

Why it works

You are asking the presenter to weigh two competing psychopathological mechanisms for the same behavior:

Explanation 1: Catatonic Negativism

The most parsimonious explanation given the full clinical picture. The textbook definition of withdrawal in catatonia explicitly includes "refusal to eat, drink, or make eye contact" (Kaplan & Sadock's Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry, Table 2.15-3). Holding food in the mouth without swallowing fits passive negativism - a failure to carry out an expected action (swallowing), not due to any identifiable content-driven reason, but as part of a global psychomotor disturbance.
This fits because the patient also had:
  • Mutism
  • Fixed posturing for hours
  • Urinary retention
  • Reduced spontaneous movement
All clustering as a catatonic syndrome - the food retention is just one more sign of the same syndrome.

Explanation 2: Command Hallucination-Driven Behavior

Theoretically possible - a voice saying "don't swallow" could produce this behavior. However, this case has no evidence for it:
  • The voices described are commentary-type, not commands ("He doesn't know anything" - not "Don't eat")
  • The patient never reported voices instructing specific actions
  • The behavior appeared in the context of a full catatonic picture, not as an isolated food refusal
For command hallucinations to explain this, you would need the patient to report a specific command content linked to the act. Without that, invoking hallucinations as the mechanism is speculative.

The Bedside Differentiation

FeatureCatatonic negativismCommand-driven refusal
Other catatonic signs presentYesNot necessarily
Patient can explain the behaviorNo - no insightMay describe the command
Behavior is global/pervasiveYes - affects movement, speech, eating togetherUsually more isolated
Responds to lorazepamYesNo specific response
Content of voices links to behaviorNoYes - specific command

The punchline for your question: In this patient, the food retention is best explained as catatonic withdrawal/negativism, not as command-hallucination compliance - because the voices he described were third-person commentary, not commands, and the behavior fits within a broader catatonic syndrome. Asking this question shows you understand that the same observable behavior can arise from entirely different psychopathological mechanisms, which is exactly what phenomenology is about.

Just one question

Here it is, clean and simple:

"The patient held food in his mouth without swallowing - phenomenologically, under which catatonic sign would you classify this behavior, and how would you distinguish it from mutism?"

That's it. One question, tight focus, directly answerable from the case, and it tests whether the presenter knows the difference between negativism (not swallowing = passive resistance to an expected action) and mutism (absence of speech) - two distinct catatonic signs that people routinely conflate.

Another question

Here is one, targeting the delusion in this case:

"The patient was 100% convinced his neighbour was his enemy, but after his brother challenged him, he dropped to 50-50. Does this shift in conviction disqualify it from being called a delusion?"

This is sharp because it forces a discussion on the core defining features of a delusion - specifically whether fixity and incorrigibility are absolute requirements, or whether a belief can still be a delusion even when partially corrected by counter-argument. The answer is nuanced: classical definitions require a delusion to be held with unshakeable conviction, but DSM-5 and modern psychopathology acknowledge that delusions exist on a spectrum, and partial insight or fluctuating conviction does not automatically downgrade a belief to an overvalued idea.

About the hallucination

Here is one, focused on the hallucination:

"The patient heard voices he believed were real, but when asked if the voices were present in the hospital, he refused to answer yes or no. What does this tell us about his insight into his hallucinations?"

This targets insight into hallucinations specifically - not insight into illness in general. The refusal to confirm or deny is more interesting than simple denial. It may reflect:
  • Partial insight - he suspects the voices may not be real but is not ready to commit
  • Fear of judgment - aware that admitting voices will be seen as "mad"
  • Ambivalence - genuinely uncertain whether what he experienced was real
This is different from a patient who flatly denies voices (no insight) or one who says "yes but I know they aren't real" (full insight). His response sits in between - and that middle ground is the richest place for a psychopathology discussion.

Can I ask it like what does it say us about the patients insight

Yes, absolutely. Frame it exactly like this:

"When asked if the voices were present in the hospital, the patient refused to give a yes or no answer. What does this tell us about the patient's insight?"

Short, direct, and perfectly worded. It will open up a discussion on the levels of insight - the presenter will need to go beyond just "good" or "poor" insight and explain where exactly this patient sits. The expected answer should touch on:
  • Insight is not binary - it exists on a spectrum (David's framework: awareness of illness, relabelling symptoms as abnormal, attribution to illness, accepting treatment)
  • The patient has not relabelled his hallucinations as abnormal - he neither confirms nor denies them at hospital
  • This is different from denial - denial is active ("I don't hear voices"); this is avoidance/ambivalence
  • It likely represents partial insight at best - he may sense something is off but cannot or will not articulate it
It is a clean, one-line question that tests depth of psychopathological thinking.

And I want to ask another question about him not urinating or eating food at other places since childhood

Here it is:

"Since childhood, the patient would not eat or urinate outside his home. What is the psychopathological basis of this behavior, and how does it relate to his current presentation?"

This is a great question because it links the premorbid personality to the current illness. The expected answer should cover:
  • Fear of negative evaluation - the core psychopathology. He wasn't avoiding food or toilets randomly; he attributed it to shyness and fear of being judged negatively by others - a hallmark of social anxiety
  • Situational avoidance - the behavior was specifically triggered in social settings and relieved when alone, which is characteristic of social anxiety disorder rather than OCD or a simple habit
  • The eating avoidance was not about food itself - he had no fear of contamination, choking, or texture. It was entirely about the social context of eating in front of others
  • Similarly, urinary avoidance outside home fits paruresis (shy bladder syndrome) - a specific manifestation of social anxiety
The link to current presentation:
  • This premorbid social anxiety likely represents a vulnerability trait that preceded the psychotic illness
  • Social anxiety disorder is well recognised as a common comorbidity and premorbid feature in schizophrenia spectrum disorders
  • His current decreased interaction and withdrawal over the last 2 weeks may be partly driven by the same underlying anxiety, now compounded by psychosis and catatonia
It grounds the discussion in longitudinal psychopathology - not just the acute episode but the patient as a whole person across time.
This is a shared conversation. Sign in to Orris to start your own chat.