One of the controversies in development of DSM-5 that is captured in the reading is the expansion of diagnostic disorder that came to be dubbed as diagnostic inflation. The word inflation means there was minimal consideration of the consequences of adding the new disorders. This is clearly captured in the words of Chairperson of DSM-IV, Frances who stated that the introduction of new disorders and changed in the definition of existing disorders may medicalize behavioral problems that may be do not qualify to be classified as such. One example is that of labeling repeated temper tantrums in children as disruptive mood dysregulation. The greatest challenge that mental illness is confronted with is that of stigmatization, hence any behavior that
The DSM-5 is a highly regarded compendium of diagnostic criteria for mental disorders. While many cognate professions have input and contribute data to the various disorder criteria, the various sources from which the changes are suggested can cause a conflict among the different professions that use it. Social work values can especially clash with the DSM-5 due to the high regard the profession has for the dignity and worth of its clients.
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 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
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
In this paper, I will challenge the criteria of “dangerousness” in the DSM-5 definition of mental disorder for two main reasons. The first is that this focus has led to the further stigmatization of mental illness, making people with serious mental illness less likely to seek treatment. Second, this focus on dangerousness also hurts the “less dangerous” mentally ill, as they often do not receive adequate help even if they are extremely distressed and dysfunctional.
The categorisation of mental illness continues today with 2 main publications, the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) created by the World Health Organisation and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) published by American Psychiatric Association. This form of categorisation facilities the process of medical treatment of the patient, by standardising the referral process between medical practioners and the diagnostic labels are primarily used as a, “convenient shorthand” among professionals and not for lay use”.
The controversy and criticism surrounding the DSM -5 models has raised questions about its credibility and has raised concerns from the public on the reliability and effectiveness. Problems with this classification system is the attempt to promote preventive psychiatry by introducing how
Even though the DSM has harsh critics surrounding the subject of diagnosis, there are those who find that the DSM is beneficial when treating clients. As previously mentioned, Clegg (2012) believes that the DSM can be utilized in various agencies and areas of social work. Social workers from different theoretical perspectives find that the DSM is approachable. The manual outlines the symptoms and diagnostic criteria surrounding a disorder. In addition, the manual highlights intervention plans for the diagnosis. These interventions can assist clients and/or their families in overcoming a diagnosis. Lastly, when clients experience symptoms of a mental disorder for the first time, they may feel defeated and unsure of where these symptoms are originating. When clinicians can diagnose their
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
This and other clinical experiences have led me to be interested in the role of emotion dysregulation and gender in the occurrence of different behaviors. For instance, I found that the primary reason given for job-burnout in law enforcement is work-related stress. Female law enforcement was not as prevalent to use alcohol to cope with their stress. Also, the innate nurturing nature of females was a significant predictor of decrease in using violent behavior. Obviously, there is still much work to be done in addressing questions related to gender differences and prediction of impulsive, aggressive behaviors. Once, I have concluded my current dissertation I will like to focus in researching the same types of behaviors but among inmates.
DSM-IV TR, which stands for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th edition), Text Revision was published by the American Psychiatric Association in 2000 and serves as a guide book for many health professionals to diagnose a patient with a mental disorder. It also helps health professionals to determine what types of treatment could be carried out to help the patient. The latest DSM is widely used, especially in the USA and many European countries.1However, it may not be completely followed by health professionals as they know that there are some weaknesses of the latest version of DSM as well. This essay will discuss the strengths and
Personality disorders are very defined and recognized in today’s society. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) published by the American Psychiatric Association provides common language and standards classifying mental disorders. The DSM is used by many people in varying disciplines in the USA as well as many other countries. In times past, people with disorders may have been outcast from a community or even persecuted. However, in our current culture the pendulum has swung in the other direction. It almost seems that there is a trend to explain all behavior by a mental disorder. This results in needing to disprove that certain people are not displaying a disorder, rather acting within a normal human emotion or
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,
Chapter 3 During the Middle Ages some “authorities” classified abnormal behaviors into two groups, those that resulted from demonic possession and those due to natural causes. The 19th-century German psychiatrist Emil Kraepelin was the first modern theorist to develop a comprehensive model of classification based on the distinctive features, or symptoms, associated with abnormal behavior patterns (see Chapter 1). The most commonly used classification system today is largely an outgrowth and extension of Kraepelin’s work: the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), published by the American Psychiatric Association. Why is it important to classify abnormal behavior? For one thing, classification is the core of science. Without labeling and organizing patterns of abnormal behavior, researchers could not communicate their findings to one another, and progress toward understanding these disorders would come to a halt. Moreover, important decisions are made on the basis of classification. Certain psychological disorders respond better to one therapy than another or to one drug than another.