Newer but not Better: Revision of the DSM-IV to DSM-V Persuasive Essay by scribbler

Newer but not Better: Revision of the DSM-IV to DSM-V
A critique of the task force and content of the revised Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM).
# 153131 | 1,605 words | 8 sources | APA | 2013 | US
Published on May 03, 2013 in Psychology (Disorders)


$19.95 Buy and instantly download this paper now

Description:

The paper discusses the fifth revision of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) that will be the standard classification of mental disorders. The paper examines the criticisms of the DSM-V task force that include a lack of scientific basis, the lack of clear methodological guidelines to support the proposed changes, the group's inability to notice errors and dangers in the current proposed changes, the lack of clear timelines and the likelihood of time pressure. The paper describes how the DSM-V intends to tackle the major criticisms of older versions in five ways, but relates that it most recklessly suggests many new categories that may inadvertently mass-produce "new false positives." The paper argues that the rates of mental disorders will soar causing overwhelming medicalization, which will demean mental disorder and lead to the purchase of numerous unnecessary medications. The paper also argues against the realm of behavioral addictions and contends that it will improperly medicalize behavioral problems, induce individual irresponsibility and create further problems in disability, insurance and forensic transactions.

Outline:
Criticisms of the DSM-5 Task Force
Proposed Contents and Criticisms

From the Paper:

"This fifth revision of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders or DSM will be the standard classification of mental disorders (Nauert, 2011). Mental health professionals and other health professionals will use this standard in their diagnoses and researches. The American Psychiatric Association released a draft of proposed changes after a decade of review and revision by the Association. Allen Frances, chairman and editor of DSM IV, and Robert Spitzer, editor of DSM III, expressed objections to the task force conducting the revisions and the proposed revisions. Present chairman is David Kupfer and vice chairman is Darrel Regier (Nauert; Collier, 2010).
"The DSM-5 Scientific Review Work Group is tasked with providing quality evidence to support the proposed revisions (Spitzer & Frances, 2010). The objections or problems relating to its work are continued secrecy, the intended paradigm shift, composition of the group, charge, method, and timing. Dr. Allen Frances' editorials assailed the work group's lack of transparency in the methods, progress, timelines, and products it uses (Collier, 2010). Dr. Robert Spitzer raised the same objection to the lack of transparency, especially when he was refused the minutes of a meeting in 2008. Dr. Spitzer argued that this lack of openness deters the free flow of information between the work group and outside experts necessary for proper revision (Collier). These were in response to the announcement made by that its deliberations and reports would be confidential and only its existence will remain public."

Sample of Sources Used:

  • Associated Press (2010). Big changes proposed in psychiatric diagnoses. MSNC:MSNC.com. Retrieved on January 26, 2011 from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35319386/ns
  • Cloud, J. (2010). The DSM: how psychiatrists redefine 'disordered.' Time:Time, Inc. Retrieved on January 26, 2010 http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1964196,00.html
  • Collier, R. (2010). DSM revision surrounded by controversy. Vol 182 # 1 Journal ofthe Canadian American Association: Canadian Medical Association. Retrieved on January 28, 2011 from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2802599
  • Frances, A. (2011). A warning sign on the road to DSM-5: beware of its unintendedconsequences. Psychiatric Times: UBM Medica LLC. Retrieved on January 26, 2011 from http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/dsm-5/content/article/101168/1425378?verify=0
  • Gever, J. (2010). More bumps in road to DSM-V. Med Page Today. Retrieved onJanuary 26, 2011 from http://www.medpagetoday.com/Psychiatry/DSM-5/24046

Cite this Persuasive Essay:

APA Format

Newer but not Better: Revision of the DSM-IV to DSM-V (2013, May 03) Retrieved October 03, 2022, from https://www.academon.com/persuasive-essay/newer-but-not-better-revision-of-the-dsm-iv-to-dsm-v-153131/

MLA Format

"Newer but not Better: Revision of the DSM-IV to DSM-V" 03 May 2013. Web. 03 October. 2022. <https://www.academon.com/persuasive-essay/newer-but-not-better-revision-of-the-dsm-iv-to-dsm-v-153131/>

Comments