Talk:Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

From Citizendium
Revision as of 15:17, 2 June 2008 by imported>David Yamakuchi (I am '''decidedly unlikely''' to change my mind about this book...D.Y.)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This article is a stub and thus not approved.
 Main Article
 Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
 
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition:  A compendium, published by the American Psychiatric Association (APA), that presents a categorization of mental disorders, as well as their associated diagnostic criteria. [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup category:  Psychology [Editors asked to check categories]
 Talk Archive:  none  English language variant:  British English

DSM and Homosexuality

When my Psych professor (Joe Mustari, Wilbur Wright College, Chicago, IL) stated that the APA had originally listed homosexuality in the DSM as a "disorder", and finally (apparently begrudgingly) removed it in the 1974(?) edition, I decided that this manual's pages will likely make an excellent substitute for toilet paper.

I didn't want to suggest we put that in the article or anything, but thought it would go a long way toward explaining my inclusion of the Szasz link. :-)--David Yamakuchi 02:45, 19 May 2008 (CDT)

Your inclusion, despite being referenced, is POV -- sorry, Larry -- and clearly informed by your positionality regarding the efficiacy of the DSM as a diagnostic tool. --Michael J. Formica 13:46, 30 May 2008 (CDT)
Michael: If you are going to retire from CZ, then I would like to offer my most sincere encouragement. If you are going to choose to stay and contribute, would you mind playing nice with the rest of us children and consider...well...consideration?--David Yamakuchi 15:17, 2 June 2008 (CDT)
All: IMHO, the DSM is misguided in it's fundamental concept, and I believe I can show I'm not the only one who thinks so. Behavior outside some statistical norm is categorized into disorders if there are social obstacles presented by the behavior. The idea appears to be that once we have labeled a disorder, we can use that information to determine treatment options.

Here is an example of why I believe this is foolish: Of all the kids that grew up in my neighborhood only one who got married has not (yet) divorced. This makes her behavior different than 97% (or so) of similar people. Since staying married so many years, (and having six children) clearly makes at least some aspects of life more difficult, this can be called a disorder...and there is a standard treatment...

That said, I suppose Szasz probably has some behaviors that are different than >95% of his contemporaries, so perhaps we could just simplify everything and "diagnose" him with some kind of disorder. Then there would be no need to even discuss the issue, and we can just eliminate his opinion as being "crazy"...eh?--David Yamakuchi 15:17, 2 June 2008 (CDT)

Retrieved from "https://citizendium.org/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:Diagnostic_and_Statistical_Manual_of_Mental_Disorders&oldid=352229"