Posted on 12/03/2012 5:40:23 PM PST by neverdem
On Saturday, the board of trustees of the American Psychiatric Association (APA) voted to approve the final text of the DSM-5, the next revision to the leading manual for diagnosing mental illness. The fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, which originated in 1952, will be released next May at the APA's annual meeting in San Francisco. The revision process leading to DSM-5 began in 1999, and APA says it consulted more than 1500 experts in 39 countries in updating the criteria for diagnosing hundreds of psychiatric conditions. It has been a bumpy ride.
Controversy has dogged the revision process for years. Even before the first draft of proposed changes was released in 2010, critics alleged that too much of the deliberation was conducted in secret and that too many of those involved had ties to drug companies that stood to benefit from changes to diagnostic criteria—APA has repeatedly rejected these charges.
And many of the diagnostic proposals have elicited a strong reaction. A proposal to combine several autism-related disorders into a single diagnosis raised concerns among some critics that it would radically alter who gets diagnosed with those disorders and angered advocates for Asperger syndrome, a milder form of autism that would be eliminated in the new scheme. A new childhood condition called disruptive mood dysregulation disorder, characterized by irritability and violent outbursts, was intended to stem the perceived overdiagnosis of childhood bipolar disorder, but critics have argued that the diagnosis lacks scientific validity. Yet another controversial proposal, to remove language that excludes people who've recently experienced the loss of a loved one from being diagnosed with major depression, elicited complaints that it would lead to the medicalization of normal grief. These changes will stand, APA said in a press release.(PDF)
APA, however, has recently backed down from other proposals, including "attenuated psychosis syndrome," a precursor to schizophrenia. The APA work group on psychotic disorders had hoped this diagnosis could help clinicians identify people at risk and intervene before they developed full-blown schizophrenia, but they ultimately abandoned it over concerns that clinicians would be unable to make the diagnosis reliably and consistently.
In a statement, APA President Dilip Jeste acknowledged the challenges the organization had faced in attempting to create a science-based diagnostic manual and the "inevitable disagreements about some of the proposals." Even so, he concluded: "We believe that DSM-5 reflects our best scientific understanding of psychiatric disorders and will optimally serve clinical and public health needs. Our hope is that the DSM-5 will lead to more accurate diagnoses, better access to mental health services, and improved patient outcomes."
And they wonder why psychology isn't taken seriously ...
Psychiatry has never been and never will be “science”.
That is when Psych and Sociology got the big influx of draft deferment majors and the New Left was really feeling its oats.
They had to do something with all the fresh diplomas, so they created a need through studies for their services.
A lot of people who couldn't hack it in other majors or who were trying to 'get their head together' ended up writing their own ticket and using the general population (especially the welfare class) for lab rats. It isn't over yet.
Why? Because it’s not a natural science? I understand that the mathematical aspect that has been a cornerstone of the natural sciences is not as strong in social sciences, and never will be, but it’s still a field of study.
When Keynesian and Marxist economists continue to peddle crackpot theories, we say that they’re wrong. We don’t question the validity of economics.
I don’t get why it is acceptable to attack psychology/psychiatry as such just because the Left has hijacked it like they have with all forms of academia.
They way things are going, we may need them. ;>)
Many years ago, dentists had the highest suicide rate within the medical community.... I never understood why.
Obviously, you're a FReeper who has not only wit, but knowledge of how they arbitrarily, under pressure from the homosexual lobby, just re-defined homosexuality and it suddenly became normalized.
More people should know the truth about the APA. It's more political than scientific.
Obviously, you're a FReeper who has not only wit, but knowledge of how they arbitrarily, under pressure from the homosexual lobby, just re-defined homosexuality and it suddenly became normalized.
More people should know the truth about the APA. It's more political than scientific.
Maybe they were down in the mouth?
Remember how homosexuality was viewed in the 1950s, and then the 1970s? It went from shameful and life-ending to deeply embarrassing. Pedophilia has made the leap to the the 1970s, and will be accepted as just another personal choice within 10 years if present trends continue. There will be no taboos at all soon enough—multiple spouses, transwhatever, you name it. PETA will have it out with those who love animals, and that battle between competing types of marxists will be about the only kind of limit there is.
Science, true science, demands repeatable results in experiments that can be performed by anyone. Psychiatry, and its bastard child psychology, can’t perform these experiments in anything remotely resembling the scientific method.
They may be fields of study, but they are not, nor will they ever be “science”.
The perception on this issue is very good. I had training in this area and chose to ignore the field.. It is truly junk science...
Ma, Ma, we’re all crazy now!
http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/204/81-Words
It was absolutely political and not scientific. Homosexuality is a mental illness and needs to be reclassified as such.
Start with the weirdest of the weird and work your way back.
It was classified as such decades ago.
My last "fun" with a shrink didn't go too well. I'm sure I'm labeled some sort of sociopath heh heh.
To: Shadow44
“Psychiatry was hijacked by the Left decades ago and stopped being scientific in the 70s.
That is when Psych and Sociology got the big influx of draft deferment majors and the New Left was really feeling its oats.
They had to do something with all the fresh diplomas, so they created a need through studies for their services.
A lot of people who couldn’t hack it in other majors or who were trying to ‘get their head together’ ended up writing their own ticket and using the general population (especially the welfare class) for lab rats. It isn’t over yet.”
I was in a business where Pyscs were a customer for some of our medical products. Even in the 1960’s to early 70’s, it was a field with a lot of weird guys.
As you noted in the 1970’s the so called profession was over run by the deviates of the left. By the 1980’s these deviates had basically taken over the power structure.
So they joined forces with the left wing lawyers, ACLU, social workers, and teacher unions and started working on their new normal where the deviates became the normal and the rest of us became the looney toons.
Now homosexualism or pro homosexual is the new norm. Pro non RX drug is the new norm. If your political views are different from the left wing, you are a knuckle dragging right wing bible thumping redneck fanatic.
The one rx drug area they have pushed are the treatments of the so called hyperactive, AD and etc. They lined up with the teachers unions to force young boys on Ritalin and similiar drugs. Now that has expanded to keeping adults on that family of drugs.
Now, the nuts/deviates/deranged pyschs are in charge working 24/7 to define their new normal with the help of the ACLU, left wing lawyers, teacher unions and liberal legislators at all levels.
Interesting is how a few female psychs have got past this left wing bs and provide good care to patients with appropriate conseling/therapy and the use of appropriate Rx therapy.
Can I be the first to claim adult DMDD? I think it's caused by following politics too closely.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.