I've always been a bit jaded about DSM ever changing based on scientific research. I think American Psychological Association needs to step in and create an alternative because outside of education diagnostic categories, DSM pretty much has a monopoly in the area and hence no pressure to change.

There is an alternative - the WHO's ICD (International Classification of Disease)

I think the actual petition linked to in the article gives a more accurate summary of the problems and advantages of the proposed changes in the DSM-5, and the PsychologyToday article comes across as a little more opinionated, speculative and less fact-based (which is understandable I guess, because it's PsychologyToday and not a journal).

I'm not overly concerned about the changes in the DSM because there are still a couple of years left before it is released, so stimulated debate should weed out major problems. And if these problems aren't sorted, everyone will just move to the ICD and the DSM will become defunct.

My DSM IV is Unspecified Psychosis - don't mess with it! It's too funny!

The DSM 5 R should become defunct. Psychiatry is not good fact base science medicine. It's about 150 years behind the times and seems dedicated to getting people dependent on powerful mind altering drugs and expensive therapy from the date of diagnosis to the end of life.

Grace wrote:The DSM 5 R should become defunct. Psychiatry is not good fact base science medicine. It's about 150 years behind the times and seems dedicated to getting people dependent on powerful mind altering drugs and expensive therapy from the date of diagnosis to the end of life.

A little overly generalized. Same thing could be said about diabetics or antibiotics when it comes to medicine. Solid fact based clinical studies are the norm in psychology as well. Unfortunately, like science, the media distorts the reality.

Here's the reality. There is no cure for mental illness. Why is that? People spend $100,000, and 10 years in therapy without any benefit whatsoever when the money runs out and the time is up. There is no distortion to the reality. Too many people now days know of people who suffer from mental illness without receiving any lasting help. Families and friends are frustrated when the mentally ill slide to rock bottom without a job or assistance, or commit suicide out of desperation. The only people who seem to be happy are the pharmaceuticals and the filthy rich in psychiatry who are enjoying their fancy cars and expensive homes. What a racket.

Grace, your view is not without merit. I received a psychological evaluation in Air Force Basic, resulting in an ELS and a 4f re-enlistment code. The doc told me, back in the day, it would have been straight to the asylum with ol' Johnny Cantor. I got a file.

Now, my "madness" seems to be restricted to my love of Gwyneth Paltrow - plenty insane for some peeps - but perhaps an indicator that "mental illness" is curable. But the only way to a cure is through psychology and science.

Grace wrote:Here's the reality. There is no cure for mental illness. Why is that? People spend $100,000, and 10 years in therapy without any benefit whatsoever when the money runs out and the time is up. There is no distortion to the reality. Too many people now days know of people who suffer from mental illness without receiving any lasting help. Families and friends are frustrated when the mentally ill slide to rock bottom without a job or assistance, or commit suicide out of desperation. The only people who seem to be happy are the pharmaceuticals and the filthy rich in psychiatry who are enjoying their fancy cars and expensive homes. What a racket.

A few misconceptions here:

1) "There is no cure for mental illness": Yes there is, there are multiple cures for a number of different conditions (including, but not limited to, phobias, PTSD, and in some cases, OCD, autism, etc). That is, they go through treatment and they come out without the symptoms that got them diagnosed in the first place - so their mental disorder is cured.

2) "Too many people now days know of people who suffer from mental illness without receiving any lasting help.": I think this ties into the "cure" thing which, even though we can cure some mental disorders, we cannot cure them all. Is this a problem? No, of course not. For most mental disorders there is a form of treatment and the effectiveness of these treatments differs from condition to condition. Incidentally, the effectiveness of a treatment is measured not only by looking at their own reported well-being and happiness, but also how well they integrate back into society.

3) "The only people who seem to be happy are the pharmaceuticals and the filthy rich in psychiatry who are enjoying their fancy cars and expensive homes.": This is a double misconception. Firstly, a significant number of people who work in the mental health field (i.e. psychologists) cannot prescribe medication. This means that there is absolutely no advantage or benefit to them for doing so. Pharma reps don't target them because they have nothing to give them. So why do psychologists still continue to get their patients set up on medication sometimes? The clear answer is that the evidence unarguably demonstrates that medication is an effective form of treatment, at least for some conditions and sometimes in combination with therapy. The second part of the misconception here, following on from the first, is that medication isn't the only treatment for mental disorders. And why should it be, considering that a large number of mental disorders are not biologically caused.

Mr.Samsa wrote:

Grace wrote:Here's the reality. There is no cure for mental illness. Why is that? People spend $100,000, and 10 years in therapy without any benefit whatsoever when the money runs out and the time is up. There is no distortion to the reality. Too many people now days know of people who suffer from mental illness without receiving any lasting help. Families and friends are frustrated when the mentally ill slide to rock bottom without a job or assistance, or commit suicide out of desperation. The only people who seem to be happy are the pharmaceuticals and the filthy rich in psychiatry who are enjoying their fancy cars and expensive homes. What a racket.

A few misconceptions here:

1) "There is no cure for mental illness": Yes there is, there are multiple cures for a number of different conditions (including, but not limited to, phobias, PTSD, and in some cases, OCD, autism, etc). That is, they go through treatment and they come out without the symptoms that got them diagnosed in the first place - so their mental disorder is cured.

From my experience, this one here is the bastard; that proper diagnosis is key. A medical doctor sees a femur sticking out of some poor chap's leg, it's pretty obvious what the problem is; it is not so obvious when one has a non-standard signal processor such as mine to find out what non-standard signals are being processed.

There's a cure for autism?


Sent from my iPhone using Magic, or somesuch.

Ironclad wrote:There's a cure for autism?

It depends on a number of issues like what you think autism actually is, and what "cure" actually means, but essentially, if caught early, a person diagnosed with autism can reach the point where they no longer meet the requirements to be diagnosed as autistic. Some people argue that this means that they are still autistic "underneath it all" but have superficially figured out how to cope, but this excuse is similar to saying that someone still has cancer, they just don't have any cancerous cells in their body after treatment. The tool used is behavioral therapy, and it works through intensive behavioral training (i.e. 40+ hours a week) to reverse many of the problems associated with autism. Depending on the severity of the condition, and how early it is caught, the success rates will differ - but a large proportion reach the point where they can no longer be classified as having autism, and nearly all will increase to some degree in functional abilities.

My daughter had an evaluation from 2 different psychiatrists. One said she had ADD requiring medication, the other one said she didn't have ADD and required no medication. I'm sure glad I got a second opinion and glad I do not put a lot of faith in the field of psychiatry.

Grace wrote:My daughter had an evaluation from 2 different psychiatrists. One said she had ADD requiring medication, the other one said she didn't have ADD and required no medication. I'm sure glad I got a second opinion and glad I do not put a lot of faith in the field of psychiatry.

Indeed. A few years ago my sister hurt her knee - the first doctor told her it was fine, and the second doctor told her that she had dislocated it. That's why I don't trust medicine..

Anecdotal reports don't tell us anything. Some doctors are good, some are bad. Some psychiatrists are good, some are bad. Some psychologists are good, some are bad. As long as the fields are based on scientific evidence, using repeatable observable results, then we can't really argue against them (without looking like creationists).

Thank you Mr Samsa

Mr.Samsa wrote:

Grace wrote:My daughter had an evaluation from 2 different psychiatrists. One said she had ADD requiring medication, the other one said she didn't have ADD and required no medication. I'm sure glad I got a second opinion and glad I do not put a lot of faith in the field of psychiatry.

Indeed. A few years ago my sister hurt her knee - the first doctor told her it was fine, and the second doctor told her that she had dislocated it. That's why I don't trust medicine..

Anecdotal reports don't tell us anything. Some doctors are good, some are bad. Some psychiatrists are good, some are bad. Some psychologists are good, some are bad. As long as the fields are based on scientific evidence, using repeatable observable results, then we can't really argue against them (without looking like creationists).

Indeed. I've had a very bad experience with psychology. They send me to an open psychological unit and randomly tried varies treatments for weeks, because I had very strong physical symptoms and was panicking. The thing is, though, that I wasn't suffering panic attacks, but a reflux esophagitis (that I still have today) and the symptons even got worse since I didn't receive appropriate treatment. I frequently told them that I didn't feel that their treatment was helping and that I was convinced that my problems were not mental in nature and that I wanted further diagnoses by real doctors. They just hand-waved all of that away.

Now the thing is that all of that does not entitle me to claim that all of psychology is bullshit and does not help people. When I was there I also got to know some people who were actually in real need for help and I am quite sure that some of them wouldn't have been able to cope with their depression (and other problems) without that.

As Mr. Samsa said, we do have evidence that quite a few psychological disorders can indeed be treated.

My brother and sister were RUINED by psychiatric quackery. No child should EVER be placed on multipharma!

"we do have evidence that quite a few psychological disorders can indeed be treated." You betcha -- LOL!

Grace wrote:My brother and sister were RUINED by psychiatric quackery.

I'm sorry to hear that, but surely you understand that your particular bad experiences don't invalidate an entire field of healthcare, right? I've had family members who have had botched up surgeries but obviously you wouldn't allow me to conclude that surgery is quackery.

Grace wrote:No child should EVER be placed on multipharma!

Phrased in such absolute terms, you are undeniably wrong and such a belief is quite simply dangerous. Ever met a child that physically cannot stop himself from bashing his head against a wall, to the point where his eye has become dislodged from the socket, or a child who scratches their skin so much that they have burrowed all the way down to their bone? Care to tell these parents that their kids should not be on medication to stop those behaviors long enough to stop them permanently through therapy?

This isn't even touching on life saving medications, like vaccinations.

Grace wrote:"we do have evidence that quite a few psychological disorders can indeed be treated." You betcha -- LOL!

I don't understand your response. Are you telling me that phobias cannot be treated with systematic desensitisation? That autism cannot be treated with intense behavioral therapy? That depression cannot be treated with CBT?

Keep in mind that none of those areas are related to "Big Pharma" and, from the perspective of the conspiracy theorist, the researchers finding evidence to support those treatments are in direct competition with "Big Pharma", since such treatments work without medication and reduce the need for medication in the long run.

Give 'em an SSRI. That should solve anything.