Controversies Surrounding Classification of Disorders Essay

The DSM IV-TR, published by the American Psychiatric Association, is the authoritative book for clinicians, psychiatrists, therapists and other healthcare professionals who diagnose mental disorders. It lists the diagnostic criteria and features, differential diagnoses, course and prevalence of the disease. It is the go-t

Top researchers and clinicians from around the world to be members of our DSM-5 Task Force, Work Groups and Study Groups. These are experts in neuroscience, biology, genetics, statistics, epidemiology, social and behavioral sciences, nosology, and public health. These members participate on a strictly voluntary basis and encompass several medical and mental health disciplines including psychiatry, psychology, pediatrics, nursing and social work. (“Who was involved,” para. 6)

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) is currently the most frequently used way of standardizing and defining psychological disorders. However, the classification systems such as DSM have advantages and disadvantages. The major weakness of DSM is that it judges symptoms superficially and ignores other possible important factors. The major strength of DSM is that it enables categorization of psychological disorders.

The strengths when working with clients on a medical model perspective is that the use of the DSM provides a common language to use in the medical community. The DSM provides reliability and structural guideline to each mental disorder. The structural guidelines in the DSM provide an organized list of criteria and specifiers to help determine the severity of the mental disorder. When diagnosing a client, there are many similar signs and symptoms to each mental disorder; thus, the DSM provides the clinician information about differential diagnosis, prevalence, possible co-morbidity, age of onset, and progressive development of symptoms. Hence, focusing on the medical model and using the DSM can be beneficial to both the client and the clinician providing treatment.

While reading over the introduction to the DSM-5 I was impressed. I have never looked at any DSM or really any mental health disorders thus far in my studies. I was mostly impressed with the strive to continue making the DSM more useful and understanding. Some things that are in the introduction to the DSM-5 that caught my attention was that the Task Force was very involved in trying to find a balance between the different disorders without confusing them together (p. 5). Another point that I found important was that the overall goal for the DSM-5 was “the degree to which two clinicians could independently arrive at the same diagnosis for a given patient” (American Psychiatric Association, 2013, p. 7). This is a strong reasoning to improve the DSM and I am actually stocked that it took this long to change things because Robert Spritzer (a psychiatrist of the twentieth century who became have a strong part in developing the DSM-III and the DSM-IIIR), back in 1974 noticed the central issue being the problem of diagnosis and psychiatrists not being able to agree on the same disorders (Spiegel, 2005).

Being able to form a diagnosis properly for a client is a process that is wide-ranging and broad. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) (American Psychiatric Association [APA], 2013) supports recommendations and standards for identifying a diagnosis for a client. The procedure of diagnosing is more than skimming for symptoms in the DSM; one must assess, interview and identify issues, as well as refer to the DSM for a diagnosis.

Diagnostic and statistical manual of Mental disorders (DSM): Standard classification of mental disorders used by mental health professionals in the US.

However, there are some drawbacks to the diagnosis of a mental illness there is benefit to it as well in such a way that it helps destigmatized and takes away labels from people who live with actual, severe mental illnesses. Diagnosis of a mental disorder also helps acknowledgement of a mental disorder from insurance companies and federal governments for coverage and funding respectively and helps people to get support and become aware that their behavioral problem is more than just a weak will or an odd behavior, at the same time diagnosis does not mean getting good treatment as well and in my opinion breaking down mental illnesses into

A significant area of dissension among scholars and psychiatrists is whether bipolarity is viewed on a spectrum (the dimensional approach) or viewed as a specific set of symptoms (the categorical approach). Ghouse at el. argue that the strict “black and white” criteria of the DSM-5

This article, published by CNN, covers a topic that was thrown into the spotlight following the release of the fourth Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or DSM IV, and has been heavily discussed as the release date of DSM V approaches. The article, which is supported by anti-DSM experts, theorizes that the medical community is over diagnosing patients with mental illnesses at an unprecedented rate. Unfortunately, the experts provide an extensive amount of bias to the article, which is clear by examining the antithesis to their arguments. Three clear examples of bias are the statements of Dr. Carroll, Kelli Montgomery, and the articles overall focus on the DSM. The bias

The structural reorganization of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-5 (DSM-5) has caused it to become highly controversial and heavily criticized (Neimeyer, 2014). The structural reorganization focuses on a more theoretical based practice rather than an evidenced based practice. Utilization of an evidenced based practice has been the norm for nearly 20 years, leaving practitioners and clinicians critical about the recent changes. Transforming into a more theoretical way of thinking is reminiscent of the ideological approach of diagnosing and treating patients in the DSM 1 and 2. DSM-5 is attempting to align itself with International Classification of Disease (ICD). This is a substantial change towards a more ideological way of diagnosis and treating patients. In an effort to become

Utility for diagnostic categories is relatively unimportant for the facilitation to a treatment or have the ability to predict an outcome to a disorder because it does not account for findings in neurobiology (Slade 2002). Frequent to fall victim in traditional designs are those in adolescent age groups. They are underrepresented primarily in mood, personality, and psychosocial disorders where a lot of collateral damage is caused without correct diagnosis or management.

Many of the diagnosis in the DSM have ample similarities in terms of symptoms, which can lead one person or patient to be diagnosed with multiple mental disorders at one time. The DSM concentrates on the symptoms and the manifestation of the mental disorders and does not offer insight as to the underlying causes. That is because it is based on the clinical and statistical patterns which create generalizations and stigmas about the diagnoses. Should the DSM actually relate to root causes of the mental disorders, the treatments and diagnoses may actually be more accurately recommended and or

Mental health disorders has been very strenuous and complex to understand and diagnose, many diagnosis criteria such as DSM have been used to determine the disorders and medication (Szabo, 2011). I am asserting that “Yes, Psychopathology diagnostic classification systems (such as the DSM or ICD) are of little use to health professionals and patients because behaviours are often misidentified and medicalised”. To assert this, this paper is going to explore four main topics that contribute to the little use of psychopathology diagnostic classification system, these include downsides for using DSM diagnostic criteria, Medicalisation and misdiagnose, consequences of medicalisation to the health professionals and community and Psychological trauma in patients. Szabo, (2011) states that Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) has been utilised to diagnose and categorize mental illness in psychiatry. However this diagnosis is focused on definitions of operational rather than the cause (Warelow & Holmes, 2011). This paper will first explore the downside of using DSM criteria to diagnose mental health.

The DSM classification system, or The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders is used in the United States. The manual was first published in 1952, written by the American Psychiatric Association (JBRF, 2017). Unlike the ICD classification system, the DSM classification system gives both a diagnosis and a classification for physical and mental health conditions. The system has gone through various revisions. Additionally, the most up to date version is the current DSM-5. The manuals design purpose is so that it is a continuous work in progress, as the world goes through change and new research is being studied (Regier et al, 2013). The DSM manual includes descriptions and symptoms for diagnosing mental disorders, but also thought