[Commpsych] DSM5

[puppet]

Thanks Lauren,

Really appreciate you passing this on.
My general instinct for situations like this is to really encourage
criticism. Having that kind of scrutiny encourages people to explain
their positions and keeps things transparent. After all the DSM will
shape future practice.

I wish that the statement acknowledged that some of the recent
DSM transparency had to be fought for.

I also wish that the statement endorsed broader inclusion of people in
the process of developing a manual. Papers late in the process are not
the best way to do academic discussion. It should be broader than
psychiatrists, psychologists, consumers and other professionals would
lead to a better, ethical manual. This is a point that Allen Frances
made recently.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-06-11/expert-warns-against-child-mental-health-checks/4064474



I also find it interesting that while most american groups spoke about
'pathologizing normality' as a risk of dimensional approaches, the APS
didn't really pick up this thread strongly. I think the APS overlooked
the fact that this point has been stringently made by American's
because of the reliance of medication there in the treatment of
disorders. It would have been great to show some international
solidarity on this social issue... but oh well.


As for my thoughts on the DSM changes:

   - happy  that  Attenuated Psychosis Syndrome has been dropped
   - wish the category  of 'schizophrenia' had been changed
   - The  Trauma and Stressor section worries me.
    Trauma theory worries me in general but seeing all those disorders
lumped together
     made me feel like i
   was reading something similar to Borges' chinese taxonomy.



David  Belasic



On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 3:09 PM, Kyli Hedrick <Kyli.Hedrick at vu.edu.au>wrote:

>  Hi Lauren,
>
>
>
> I have not yet finished reading the APS submission concerning the
> revisions to DSM5, however, I am already concerned about the 'tone' taken
> by the APS. This positive 'tone' is in contrast, as you mentioned, with the
> outpourings of criticisms from many other high profile organizations.
>
>
>
> I am also concerned about the lowering of diagnostic thresholds, the
> overemphasis on biological and medical factors (whilst ignoring cultural,
> social, political and systemic factors) as well as some of the problematic
> categories of diagnosis, such as Female Sexual Dysfunction and Paraphilic
> Coercive Disorder, among others.
>
>
>
> What do others think?
>
>
>
> Warm regards,
>
>
>
> Kyli
>  ------------------------------
> *From:* commpsych-bounces at lists.curtin.edu.au [
> commpsych-bounces at lists.curtin.edu.au] on behalf of Lauren Breen [
> Lauren.Breen at curtin.edu.au]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, 18 July 2012 12:51 PM
> *To:* Commpsych (commpsych at lists.curtin.edu.au)
> *Subject:* [Commpsych] DSM5
>
>   Here is the Australian Psychological Society’s submission concerning
> the revisions to DSM5
> http://www.psychology.org.au/Assets/Files/APS-DSM-5-submission.pdf
>
>
>
> In my reading of the document, the APS seems to be quite positive – e.g.,
> the APS “sees the DSM-5 revision as implementing several improvements in
> the conceptualisation and definition of psychiatric disorders” – which
> contrasts with the at times scathing criticisms levelled by many other
> professional organisations at the DSM5 revisions.
>
>
>
> I’m concerned about comments such as “The APS has no problem about the
> Paraphilic Coercive Disorder…” – well I am concerned. Doesn’t this label
> potentially legitimate rape as a mental illness? Same for Pedophilia
> Disorder. I’m also concerned about the reduced thresholds for diagnosis,
> the reification of mental disorder, the medicalization of difference, the
> concern about pharmaceutical kickbacks etc etc.
>
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Lauren
>
>
>
>
>
> This email, including any attachment, is intended solely for the use of
> the intended recipient. It is confidential and may contain personal
> information or be subject to legal professional privilege. If you are not
> the intended recipient any use, disclosure, reproduction or storage of it
> is unauthorised. If you have received this email in error, please advise
> the sender via return email and delete it from your system immediately.
> Victoria University does not warrant that this email is free from viruses
> or defects and accepts no liability for any damage caused by such viruses
> or defects.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Commpsych mailing list
> Commpsych at lists.curtin.edu.au
> https://lists.curtin.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/commpsych
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.curtin.edu.au/pipermail/commpsych/attachments/20120718/4db142b6/attachment.htm