I don't work in this field any more, but for 17 years I was responsible for assessing medical claims. As part of that, we used to get sent on training days to attend workshops and seminars with leading consultants.
Sometimes there would be a day themed around a certain illness that was particularly common. I've attended multiple training days for both CFS and fibromyalgia. Over the years I've assessed quite literally hundreds of claims for CFS and fibro. I always group them together because there are similar challenges, even though they're distinct and separate conditions.
Attending the seminars was fascinating, listening to the theories from the various viewpoints - rheumatological, neurological, and yes, psychiatric too.
What became clear was that with these diagnoses, the doctors really didn't have much of a clue, just a bunch of theories. The symptoms experienced by patients were very real, but the doctors didn't really know what was happening or why. I can remember that there seemed to be different and distinct strands of the conditions. And I still believe that although it's all lumped in together, there's probably different types of fibro with different causes. Same for CFS.
The other thing that was clear is that not treating people holistically is a real failing in this country. Consultants like to put patients in a certain box, and when they have a condition that straddles multiple specialities, they don't know what to do.
My DP has a condition that crosses between ENT and neurology (not fibro) and most of the time his care has fallen down a hole in the middle with neither dept keen on helping because it's not strictly and definitively "theirs". The GP ends up picking up the slack but they're not knowledgeable about the condition to be effective.
I think it's very much the same with fibro and CFS. WIthout a clear cause it just gets given as a diagnosis when nothing else fits and the symptoms seem to be right, and with no one really wanting to follow up on it holistically. Patients are left with a diagnosis and a shrug.
It would also be wrong of me not to acknowledge that, during my years of assessment, there was a disproportionate number of fibro claimants who had a history of anxiety, depression etc. Not exclusively so, but certainly higher than average. I think this co-morbidity is what has given it such a bad reputation, with too many people viewing it as made-up or exaggerated - because we all know what the general public thinks about individuals who have experienced difficulties with their mental health.....
The overlap doesn't mean it is definitely a psychiatric condition in those claimants - it could still have been due to autoimmune/inflammation etc. Might not be relevant. No one knows. The co-morbidity in some sufferers is just interesting to note.
In an ideal world there would be a multi-disciplinary approach to treating fibro, including psychological support as needed.
I think the other problem with fibro and CFS is that the symptoms can fluctuate with manageable days and bad days. The general public tends to view ANY condition like this with real suspicion. Anyone who is enjoying an activity on a manageable day will always be treated with disbelief on a bad day. It's like people wilfully refuse to believe that fluctuating conditions exist.