Strengths and Weaknesses of the Dsm

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

This diversity in the professions that contribute to the criteria found in the DSM-5 can only assist in assuring the validity of the disorders presented within it. The disorders contained in the manual all have a series of specific requirements that an individual must

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

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

According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR), “the essential feature of

There hope is to diagnosis and treat the illness at hand. This article questions the validity of diagnosing each patient. If the doctors or the nurses’ diagnosis is wrong then, the treatment will also be wrong. This can create complications for all parties at hand. Most often there is protocol that most doctors have to follow when diagnosing a patient “However, it should not be forgotten that they are all using same diagnostic manual, and probability of diagnosing a person is in depression with same instructions.”(). Now this makes a person question whether the validity is of the doctor or the protocol. If it is the protocol than that is something that needs to be evaluated. At the time the DSM system was in use for diagnosing a patient. At the time of this experiment Rosenhan used the DSM-II statistical evaluation. Years later this statistical data was look over, “According to Mattison, Cantwell, Russell, Will (1979) general inter-rater reliability of DSM-II was about %57 and %54 for axis I in DSM-III. In DSM III, which is published twelve years later after first version of DSM II, reliability scores of psychosis, conduct disorder, hyperactivity, and mental retardation was slightly higher than general reliability scores; however, as it is accepted today with the circumstance of logical base, reliability under 0.7-0.8 is found questionable and possibility of error is

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.

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

DSM-5 and ICD-11 are used by healthcare providers to study and identify psychological disorders. Nonetheless, these two manuels differ from one another in many ways. DSM-5 is the Diagnostic and Statistical Manuel of Mental Disorders. It was formed by the American Psychiatric Association to enhance diagnoses, treatment, research methods today. This manuel is used to classify mental disorders by assessing the symptoms that are present in various clinical settings such as outpatient, clinical, and primary care. Then there is the ICD-11 which is the International Classification of Diseases. It was created by the World Health Organizations to define various diseases and report health conditions. This manual is a compilation of definitions, social

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

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 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,