The Latest on DSM-V

Post Reply New Topic

Hello!

On top of everything that DSM-V is going to change concerning Asperger's and autism in general, thus article on Fox News opens up a new Pandora's box of worries about what may happen if DSM-V is implemented in its current form:

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2012/02/0 ... perts-say/

In a nutshell, it opens up a whole new world of normal reactions to life-changing events that could, under the new DSM, could be now be considered 'mental disorders'. Given this, it would appear that this new revision of the DSM needs to be totally scrapped for now, and a new rewrite of the the current DSM to begin anew, from scratch. As mentioned in the article, a lot of people in the mental health profession are currently advocating just that.

Have A Great Day!

Rob

Folks, say what you will, but I used to investigate medical fraud for the Defense Department. I did it for 4 years. My biggest case involved some $72.4 Billion in taxpayer dollars. So I ought to know a scam when I see it. Folks, it looks like a scam, smells like a scam, walks like a scam, talks like a scam. This is definately a scam.

-Longshanks

I'm sorry but I don't really see what the big deal is. All this talk about medicalising normal human traits is missing the point. Just because it's 'natural' to be depressed when a close one dies doesn't mean you can't benefit from therapy and temporary antidepressants. Just because it's 'natural' for some children to be shy doesn't mean these children can't benefit from some social-skill or confidence building sessions. Just because certain mental/emotional problems are seen as 'normal' or 'common' doesn't mean they can't be fixed or improved. As far as I'm aware no one is suggesting mandatory treatment for these kinds of problems, but why not make treatment available to those who want it?

I think people are just still scared of the term 'mental illness'. All it really means is that there is some mental/emotional/etc. issue that is negatively affecting your life.

As for the part in the article "labels like "paraphilic coercive disorder"... may allow offenders to escape prison by providing what could be seen as an excuse for their behavior" I can pretty much guarantee that that won't happen. Surely we can agree that these people have issues and that some kind of mental health treatment would be very helpful for rehabilitation and prevent reoffending, but I doubt any judge would actually allow people to use this to get out of prison. You have to be pretty far gone to successfully use the insanity plea.

How tight is the connection and use between DSM and the law?, ie what will be forced upon people one way or another?

Good question. I'm a law student and a paralegal - not a lawyer yet. There could be some ramificiations as the courts depend on "expert" testamony and scholarly documents. The DSM fits into that catagory.

In some aspect I consider psychology a pseudo science because the profession can't deterministicly falsify their conclusions. In physics, math etc, you have to prove your claims.

Fox news.

Meh...

Doesn't surprise me at all. Anything that might help people who really need it is seen as a conspiracy to derail the American Dream by them.

About as objective and reliable as CNN. Neither one is worth my time.

I'm wary of the psych profession for the simple fact that a majority of my medical fraud investigations, including that $72.4 Billion one, were psych practices. There are some very good and honorable psych providers, don't get me wrong. But, like lawyers and physicians, there are also some bad apples out there. Problem is, some of those bad apples who find that they can't make it in the real world go on to teach or work for the company that puts out the DSM and other professional publications. See where I'm going with this?

As quoted from a GRASP Carley E-mail:

"A great editorial from Bloomberg News recently reminds us that the reasons for changing the coding system for DSM editions is that with the fifth edition they plan on doing revisions of the same edition, so that we would eventually see version 5.1, 5.2...etc., which you can't do with a "V." The editorial makes a great point in that if you KNOW you're not going to get it right the first time with this new edition, don't put in print."

I thought it was important to say that any "change" that the American Psychiatric Association or whatever "reputable" organization wants to change be very wary of. Even a matter of changing a roman numeral "V" to and "5", I could imagine that when certain conflicts with minute, but important details come along, it could be the difference between something dumb like under DSM-V, so and so is eligible for social services. Now that the diagnosis has been renamed DSM-5, some of those services are being denied automatically.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/01/opini ... iefly.html

I thought it important to mention this recent article on a person's personal experience with Aspergers. This article, while I think very authentic, heartfelt, and truthful, says a couple of big things to me. It tells me that there are probably a lot of psychologists out there who "stick to the book" and "do not get it" when reading personalities. They just go by a few quirky traits without further analysis basically. It also seems to imply that there are a lot of overly diagnosed people. This hurts those of us who feel we meld into the real world, but show traits or have shown traits in such a way that we deserve the diagnosis. What's ironic about this is that some people such as myself who have the diagnosis do not feel it's necessary to advertise it to the whole world. And it's not- that is each individual's/family's choice.

AS want to reduce sensory input, NT wants to keep habit ?

However NT tend to assume NT is right and anything else is wrong..

There's a difference to change for it's own sake, or because it's a significant improvement from previous way of doing things.