Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > News Items
Re: DSM-V Shadow Team now taking comments
Ursus:
--- Quote from: "SEKTO" ---...the ICD was first published before the DSM was. So, why did the American Psychological Association the create DSM in the first place? Why not, instead of trying to bring the DSM into concordance with the ICD and vice-versa, produce just one reference book that would set the international standard for diagnosis, epidemiology, and classification? It seems like in the longer run, such a move would end much confusion, and would be a generally simpler, yet more elegant and "streamlined" system for everyone concerned.
--- End quote ---
Because the Americans (i.e., the APA, in this case) want(s) more control of it.
See also:
The Americanization of Mental Illness
viewtopic.php?f=32&t=29903[/list]
SEKTO:
DSM-V is not all bad news. It turns the jumble of developmental syndromes for children into a single group of "autism spectrum disorders," which makes sense because previously, with Asperger's as a separate disease, it was like trying to draw lines in a bucket of water. But the basic problems of the previous DSM series are left untouched.
"...like trying to draw lines in a bucket of water." I like that.
Ursus:
--- Quote from: "Edward Shorter (above WSJ article)" ---DSM-V is not all bad news. It turns the jumble of developmental syndromes for children into a single group of "autism spectrum disorders," which makes sense because previously, with Asperger's as a separate disease, it was like trying to draw lines in a bucket of water. But the basic problems of the previous DSM series are left untouched.
--- End quote ---
Beg to differ on Shorter's "disease" characterization of Aspergers, however... "Disorder" is okay, but the most appropriate description would be "developmental syndrome," imo...
SEKTO:
My Abnormal Psych professor told us the other day that the ASD are being moved from Axis 2 to Axis 1, and that "they" are changing the name of Borderline PD, and moving it to Axis 1 as well. In other words, these are being recategorized from "Developmental Disorders and Personality Disorders" to in the future being considered "Clinical Syndromes." That is to say, these are being medicalized. (cha-ching $$$)
Further, the Abnormal Psych prof told us just a few days ago that the APA (concurrent with the 2013 publication of DSM-V) is also proposing to change the criteria by which one can become qualified to diagnose mental health clients, as well as the training procedures through which a person can be qualified to make such diagnoses. After May of 2013, according to my prof, it may very well come to pass that anybody who completes a two-to-four year training program (even somebody without an undergraduate degree) can become qualified to diagnose clients out of the newly revised DSM. Unbelievable.
Yeah, I think that DSM is little more than a hunk of toilet paper in fancy packaging too. But, I also say that even though it is for the most part lacking in validity, it's still better than nothing, and in some senses is at least an improvement upon the systems of old. Just fifty short years ago I would likely have been made (on the orders of a doctor and as part of some "medical treatment" for relief of my depression) to inhale carbon monoxide until I passed out and began convulsing, or given a deliberate overdose of insulin, or maybe I would have been lobotomoized and put in some back ward. We are making progress, albeit slowly. This is my opinion.
Ursus:
--- Quote from: "SEKTO" ---My Abnormal Psych professor told us the other day that the ASD are being moved from Axis 2 to Axis 1, and that "they" are changing the name of Borderline PD, and moving it to Axis 1 as well. In other words, these are being recategorized from "Developmental Disorders and Personality Disorders" to in the future being considered "Clinical Syndromes." That is to say, these are being medicalized. (cha-ching $$$)
Further, the Abnormal Psych prof told us just a few days ago that the APA (concurrent with the 2013 publication of DSM-V) is also proposing to change the criteria by which one can become qualified to diagnose mental health clients, as well as the training procedures through which a person can be qualified to make such diagnoses. After May of 2013, according to my prof, it may very well come to pass that anybody who completes a two-to-four year training program (even somebody without an undergraduate degree) can become qualified to diagnose clients out of the newly revised DSM. Unbelievable.
--- End quote ---
Geez Louise! Gotta wonder just what kind of "professional standards" someone sans undergraduate degree but with a "a two-to-four year training program" under their belt ... feels beholden to. And just who is in charge of these training programs?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version