When it was first published in 1980, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Third Edition—univer-sally known as DSM-III—embodied a radical new method for identifying psychiatric illness. Kirk and Kutchins challenge the general understanding about the research data and the pro-cess that led to the peer acceptance of DSM-III. Their original and controversial reconstruction of that moment concen-trates on how a small group of researchers interpreted their findings about a specific problem—psychiatric reliability—to promote their beliefs about mental illness and to challenge the then-dominant Freudian paradigm.
“Gary Greenberg has become the Dante of our psychiatric age, and the DSM-5 is his Inferno.” —Errol Morris Since its debut in 1952, the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders has set down the “official” view on what constitutes mental illness. Homosexuality, for instance, was a mental illness until 1973. Each revision has created controversy, but the DSM-5 has taken fire for encouraging doctors to diagnose more illnesses—and to prescribe sometimes unnecessary or harmful medications. Respected author and practicing psychotherapist Gary Greenberg embedded himself in the war that broke out over the fifth edition, and returned with an unsettling tale. Exposing the deeply flawed process behind the DSM-5’s compilation, The Book of Woe reveals how the manual turns suffering into a commodity—and made the APA its own biggest beneficiary.
A persuasive and passionate plea from two mental health professionals to ease use of the Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders under their belief that it is leading to an over-diagnosed society. For many health professionals, the Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) is an indispensable resource. As the standard reference book for psychiatrists and psychotherapist everywhere, the DSM has had an inestimable influence on the way medical professionals diagnosis mental disorders in their patients. But with a push to label clients with pathological disorders in order to get reimbursed by insurance companies, the purpose of the DSM is no longer serving as a reference book. Instead, it is acting as a list of things that can qualify a patient’s diagnosis. In Making Us Crazy, Stuart Kirk and Herb Kutchins evaluate how the DSM has become the influence behind diagnoses that assassinate character and slander the opposition, often for political or monetary gain. By examining how the reference book serves as a source to label every phobia and quirk that arises in a patient, Kirk and Kutchins question the overuse of the DSM by today’s mental health professionals.
Revised version of the 1981 publication includes over 100 new cases to aid the clinician using the concepts and terminology of the DSM-III-R. Organized into: adult, child, and adolescent cases, international and historical cases. No bibliography. Annotation copyrighted by Book News, Inc., Portland, OR
The Conceptual Evolution of DSM-5 highlights recent advances in our understanding of cross-cutting factors relevant to psychiatric diagnosis and nosology. These include developmental age-related aspects of psychiatric diagnosis and symptom presentation; underlying neuro-circuitry and genetic similarities that may clarify diagnostic boundaries and inform a more etiologically-based taxonomy of disorder categories; and gender/culture-specific influences in the prevalence of and service use for psychiatric disorders. This text also considers the role of disability in the diagnosis of mental disorders and the potential utility of integrating a dimensional approach to psychiatric diagnosis. A powerful reference tool for anyone practicing or studying psychiatry, social work, psychology, or nursing, The Conceptual Evolution of DSM-5 details the proceedings from the 2009 American Psychopathological Association's Annual Meeting. In its chapters, readers will find a thorough review of the empirical evidence regarding the utility of cross-cutting factors in nosology, as well as specific suggestions for how they may be fully integrated into the forthcoming fifth edition of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.
When it was first published in 1980, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Third Edition--universally known as DSM-III--embodied a radical new method for identifying psychiatric illness. Kirk and Kutchins challenge the general understanding about the research data and the process that led to the peer acceptance of DSM-III. Their original and controversial reconstruction of that moment concentrates on how a small group of researchers interpreted their findings about a specific problem--psychiatric reliability--to promote their beliefs about mental illness and to challenge the then-dominant Freudian paradigm.
In 2013, the American Psychiatric Association published the 5th edition of its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). Often referred to as the “bible” of psychiatry, the manual only classifies mental disorders and does not explain them or guide their treatment. While science should be the basis of any diagnostic system, to date, there is no knowledge on whether most conditions listed in the manual are true diseases. Moreover, in DSM-5 the overall definition of mental disorder is weak, failing to distinguish psychopathology from normality. In spite of all the progress that has been made in neuroscience over the last few decades, the psychiatric community is no closer to understanding the etiology and pathogenesis of mental disorders than it was fifty years ago. In Making the DSM-5, prominent experts delve into the debate about psychiatric nosology and examine the conceptual and pragmatic issues underlying the new manual. While retracing the historic controversy over DSM, considering the political context and economic impact of the manual, and focusing on what was revised or left unchanged in the new edition, this timely volume addresses the main concerns of the future of psychiatry and questions whether the DSM legacy can truly improve the specialty and advance its goals.
When it was first published in 1980, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Third Edition—univer-sally known as DSM-III—embodied a radical new method for identifying psychiatric illness. Kirk and Kutchins challenge the general understanding about the research data and the pro-cess that led to the peer acceptance of DSM-III. Their original and controversial reconstruction of that moment concen-trates on how a small group of researchers interpreted their findings about a specific problem—psychiatric reliability—to promote their beliefs about mental illness and to challenge the then-dominant Freudian paradigm.
From "the most powerful psychiatrist in America" (New York Times) and "the man who wrote the book on mental illness" (Wired), a deeply fascinating and urgently important critique of the widespread medicalization of normality Anyone living a full, rich life experiences ups and downs, stresses, disappointments, sorrows, and setbacks. These challenges are a normal part of being human, and they should not be treated as psychiatric disease. However, today millions of people who are really no more than "worried well" are being diagnosed as having a mental disorder and are receiving unnecessary treatment. In Saving Normal, Allen Frances, one of the world's most influential psychiatrists, warns that mislabeling everyday problems as mental illness has shocking implications for individuals and society: stigmatizing a healthy person as mentally ill leads to unnecessary, harmful medications, the narrowing of horizons, misallocation of medical resources, and draining of the budgets of families and the nation. We also shift responsibility for our mental well-being away from our own naturally resilient and self-healing brains, which have kept us sane for hundreds of thousands of years, and into the hands of "Big Pharma," who are reaping multi-billion-dollar profits. Frances cautions that the new edition of the "bible of psychiatry," the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-5 (DSM-5), will turn our current diagnostic inflation into hyperinflation by converting millions of "normal" people into "mental patients." Alarmingly, in DSM-5, normal grief will become "Major Depressive Disorder"; the forgetting seen in old age is "Mild Neurocognitive Disorder"; temper tantrums are "Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder"; worrying about a medical illness is "Somatic Symptom Disorder"; gluttony is "Binge Eating Disorder"; and most of us will qualify for adult "Attention Deficit Disorder." What's more, all of these newly invented conditions will worsen the cruel paradox of the mental health industry: those who desperately need psychiatric help are left shamefully neglected, while the "worried well" are given the bulk of the treatment, often at their own detriment. Masterfully charting the history of psychiatric fads throughout history, Frances argues that whenever we arbitrarily label another aspect of the human condition a "disease," we further chip away at our human adaptability and diversity, dulling the full palette of what is normal and losing something fundamental of ourselves in the process. Saving Normal is a call to all of us to reclaim the full measure of our humanity.
