In a continuing series, Scientific American analyzes the “Trouble at the Heart of Psychiatry’s Revised Rule Book.”
Part 1: Psychiatrists Are About to Shift the Boundaries between Sane and Insane by Ingrid Wickelgren
Part 2: Science Remains a Stranger to Psychiatry’s New Bible Ferris Jabr explains why science has so far played only a bit part in the creation of the new DSM.
Part 3 Trouble at the Heart of Psychiatry’s Revised Rule Book Edward Shorter, a historian of psychiatry at the University of Toronto, argues that the principal diagnoses of the DSM—depression, schizophrenia and bipolar disorder—are artifacts and should essentially be discarded.
Part 4: The Gloom-and-Doom Disease: Should Woody Allens Have a Home in the Manual of Mental Illness? By Ingrid Wickelgren
Part 5: Why Are There No Biological Tests in Psychiatry? Allen Frances, the chief framer of the DSM-IV, tells us why we lack biological tests for mental illness and how that deficiency hurts diagnosis.
excellent: as far as I can tell this article in a major magazine says psychiatry’s main text is pretty near bunkum.
To my eyes this looks like proof of a growing movement against the validity of psychiatric diagnosis
Report comment
I love it that the DSM-5 is being criticized everywhere. The tenacious Allen Frances has done a brilliant job — one person can make a difference!
Report comment
Allen Frances has produced the previous DSM IV, and IV-TR. This is the current volume that is used to diagnose people. I find it deeply strange and suspicious that AF has come out to criticize DSM Cinco when it is only marginally different from his own work. Nearly everything is identical. Whats going on there!
Report comment