Critical Analysis of the Dsm Iv Tr

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

It is sometimes argued that “the creators of DSM-III and DSM-IV sacrificed validity for the sake of reliability”(Wakefield, 1992, cited in Gray, 2002, p 614). This refers to greater emphasis being placed upon superficial symptoms and less upon underlying symptoms and possible cause which could have an important influence upon individuals (Gray, 2002). Since behavior always involve interaction between the individual and their environment, it can be difficult to assess whether the disorder is within the person or whether it is an environmental influence such as a traumatic experience or related to poverty (Gray, 2002, p.612). This can cause problems when diagnosing is extremely difficult to scientifically distinguish between people’s normal responses or whether it is something more (Gray, 2002).

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.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) has a number of features. First of all, every disorder is identified using a name and a numerical code. In addition, the manual provides the criteria for diagnosing each disorder as well as establishes subtypes of a disorder and examples that would illustrate the disorder. The manual goes further by addressing the typical age of onset, culturally related information, gender-related information, prevalence of a disorder, typical clinical course of a disorder, typical predisposing factors of a disorder and genetic family patterns of a disease (Summers, 2009). The DSM-IV is a tool that is used by mental health practitioners and social service workers. As has been demonstrated

Personality disorders are included as mental disorders on Axis II of the diagnostic manual of the American Psychiatric Association and in the mental and behavioral disorders section of the ICD manual of the World Health Organization Personality disorders are conditions in which an individual differs significantly from an average person, in terms of how they think, perceive, feel or relate to others. Changes in how a person feels and distorted beliefs about other people can lead to odd behavior, which can be distressing and may upset others There are three recognized personality disorder clusters, cluster A odd and eccentric, Paranoid Personality Disorder Schizoid Personality Disorder Schizotypal Personality Disorder dramatic and emotional, Borderline Personality Disorder Histrionic Personality Disorder Narcissistic Personality Disorder and anxious and fearful Avoidant Personality Disorder Dependent Personality Disorder Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder Personality Disorders: Management

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).

The DSM is used as a standard of reference for psychological diagnosis. The DSM was originally published in 1952 containing only 106 diagnoses; today the revised DSM-IV-TR contains 365 diagnoses. Throughout the history of the DSM, individuals in the mental health profession have relied on it for clarification of disorders, facilitating research, improving communication with other professionals and improving the collection of clinical information. With a new DSM-V underway, there has been a lot of issues surrounding the contents and classifications of the new DSM. There are

Mental illness in this manner is the belief that such illnesses can be identified and classified (As in the DSM & ICD)

The DSM is a classified system used by psychiatrist and other clinical professions in order to diagnose clients and patients who show signs of some type of disorder. The two advantages of using this model or classification system ranges from the validity of an assessment used by clinicians and other health care professionals. Build around the concepts and purposes for the DSM model is that it supports a number of standard assessments of diagnosing different treatment providers. Furthermore, (Comer, J. 2016) suggest that the DSM-5 requires clinicians to provide both categorical and dimensional information which is part of being consistent in diagnosing. From a categorical perspective this refers to the name of a particular category of a disorder which is indicated on behalf of the client’s symptoms. From the dimensional perspective it is a rating of how the client symptoms and the severity of the dysfunction through various dimensions.

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.

Within the realms of psychology, classification systems are imperative and allow for appropriate organization and proper descriptions of a patient’s psychological diagnosis. (Hunsley, J. & Lee, M. Catherine, 2010). Classification is a central element of all branches of science and social science, and is how clinicians perform their job to diagnose patients. The two, main types of classification systems are the categorical approach and the dimensional approach. In a broad view, the categorical approach is an one in which a person or object is determined to either be a member of a specific category or not, and the dimensional approach is based on the assumption that the object or person being classified differs in the extent to which they possess certain characteristics and properties (Hunsley & Lee, 2010). The controversy over dimensional versus categorical approaches to diagnosis as manifested in the recent development and publication of the DSM-V is a debate that is one to take note of. Numerous limitations and benefits to both the categorical and dimensional approaches exist, and are widely discussed by researchers when speaking of the production of the DSM-V in regards to personality disorders (PDs). This paper will mainly focus on the diagnosing of one with Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD), and how the changes from the categorical approach to dimensional approach in the recent

The diagnostic process for personality disorders currently covers a broad scope of various tests and symptoms, causing a source of frustration for psychiatrists (Aldhous). The symptoms and side effects of several personality disorders can tend to blur together, making diagnosis challenging (Aldhous). Most psychiatric patients are diagnosed with several personality disorders at once, with twenty percent of people with personality disorders simply diagnosed with a “personality disorder not otherwise specified” (Aldhous). Using the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health Disorders, commonly referred to as the DSM, psychiatrists attempt with great difficulty to categorize their patients into a specific disorder, only to diagnose

Dombeck, M., Hoermann, S., Zupanick, E.C. (2011). Personality Disorders: Problems with current diagnostic system. MentalHelp. Retrieved on 14th March, 2013, from http://www.mentalhelp.net/poc/view_doc.php?type=doc&id=569

Psychopathology is a term, which refers to either the study of mental illness, mental distress or the manifestation of behaviors and experiences, which may be indicators to mental illness, or psychological impairment (Psychopathology, n.d.) Within clinical counseling, the use tends to be in the treatment of mental disorders, the origins or the development of mental disorder. Technologies are being used, as well as have been, developed that require an accurate model, which is always being advanced within the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health Disorders, or the DSM. (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). For example, recent technology includes molecular genetics and mature statistical models. Which will in term assist in attempts to better understand where psychological disorders originate form. Currently, most psychopathology research follows the guidelines based in the fourth edition of the DSM, which assumes that mental disorders

The DSM itself states “diagnosis require clinical judgment (American Psychiatric Association, 2013, p. 19) indicating the fact that two therapist may see things differently. This concept would have to be considered a weakness as consensus is key validity and reliability of diagnosis and subsequent treatment. The article goes on to discuss the idea that the diagnosis of mental illness is more of an art form than a scientific process (Zur & Nordmarken, 2016). Finally, the most harsh factor against the DSM-5 is the outcry by leading professionals. The article points out that the chairman of its predecessor the DSM-4 Dr. Allen Frances was a critic of the DSM-5 from the very beginning. Change on any level is difficult so for Dr. Frances to urge caution is one; however, for him to say “this is the saddest moment in a 45 year career” to the American Psychiatric Association’s approval of the DSM-5 is troubling. Dr. Frances is not alone is his objection to this text. The director of the National Institute of Mental Health; Dr. Thomas Insel joined the opposition stating he will drive his organization’s research away from the DSM-5 (Zur & Nordmarken,