The DSM-IV-V: The New Categorical Approach

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

Debates regarding personality disorders is considered wildly controversial in the field of psychology. I personally think it is because the subject is still being studied and constantly changing. Researchers still have a lack of knowledge regarding personality disorders, and when the DSM-IV came out a lot of people were not thrilled with the classification system and changes. Many proposals were introduced before the DSM-IV was published but, they were never included in the revision. Since professionals weren't positive in the diagnosis and treatments, stating that they had “too many permutations”, they decided to leave the proposals out of the revision. Another big changed presented in the DSM-IV revision was, eliminating four previous personality

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).

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 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.

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,

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

Challenges of DSM-5’s Inclusivity: The DSM-5 is the first DSM to say that if they were to make a mistake diagnosing someone, they would rather it be a type one error than a type two error. In other words, the DSM-5 would rather diagnose more people and misdiagnose someone, than not diagnosing someone when they are actually mentally ill. Since, this is the first DSM to accept type one error over type two error, there are many different challenges concerning the inclusivity of it. The positives of the DSM-5’s inclusivity is that more people are diagnosed and there is less of a chance of missing someone.

From time to time we all have periods of sadness, unhappy thoughts. Among the United States population, around eight to ten percent suffer from a form of depression as unipolar depression. Depressive and bipolar disorders show to be a principal cause of disability, without cure a person can have a tough experience with relationships, work, and social activities. Substance abuse disorders are becoming an rampant. The need for instant indulgence has become more and more widespread in the world. The DSM-5 shows the symptoms checklist for diagnosis of substance abuse disorder (see table 1.3 in appendix a), and according to Comer, (2014) “the substances people misuse fall into several categories: depressants, stimulants, hallucinogens, and cannabis”

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.

Also in the Introduction a brief history of the DSM-5 is mentioned along with DSM-5 Revision process, Proposals for Revisions, DSM-5 Field Trials, Public and professional review, Expert Review, Organizational structure, Harmonization with ICD-11, Dimension Approach to diagnosis, Developmental and lifespan considerations,

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

Describe the purpose and features of DSM-5. Include the difference between categorical information and dimensional information and provide an example of each.

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

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