Strength and weaknesses of DSM5

The DSM IV-TR, published by the American Psychiatric Association, is the authoritative book for clinicians, psychiatrists, therapists and other healthcare professionals who diagnose mental disorders. It lists the diagnostic criteria and features, differential diagnoses, course and prevalence of the disease. It is the go-t

Prior to DSM-5, the American Psychiatric Association was very clear that the DSM “is a categorical classification that divides mental disorders into types based on criterion sets with defining features,” (APA, 2000). Specifically, the developers of the DSM conceptualized mental health disorders as polythetic, meaning there are specific features that comprise each disorder, but these features are neither necessary nor sufficient (Carragher, Krueger, Eaton, & Slade, 2015; Widiger, & Trull, 2007). The underlying assumptions are that a mental health disorder is caused by a specific pathology, and a category, or prototype can represent a qualitative distinction between normality and abnormality. It is intended that clinicians use the DSM to determine which disorder best explains a patient’s symptoms based on the given diagnostic criteria, which represent an operational

While reading over the introduction to the DSM-5 I was impressed. I have never looked at any DSM or really any mental health disorders thus far in my studies. I was mostly impressed with the strive to continue making the DSM more useful and understanding. Some things that are in the introduction to the DSM-5 that caught my attention was that the Task Force was very involved in trying to find a balance between the different disorders without confusing them together (p. 5). Another point that I found important was that the overall goal for the DSM-5 was “the degree to which two clinicians could independently arrive at the same diagnosis for a given patient” (American Psychiatric Association, 2013, p. 7). This is a strong reasoning to improve the DSM and I am actually stocked that it took this long to change things because Robert Spritzer (a psychiatrist of the twentieth century who became have a strong part in developing the DSM-III and the DSM-IIIR), back in 1974 noticed the central issue being the problem of diagnosis and psychiatrists not being able to agree on the same disorders (Spiegel, 2005).

Top researchers and clinicians from around the world to be members of our DSM-5 Task Force, Work Groups and Study Groups. These are experts in neuroscience, biology, genetics, statistics, epidemiology, social and behavioral sciences, nosology, and public health. These members participate on a strictly voluntary basis and encompass several medical and mental health disciplines including psychiatry, psychology, pediatrics, nursing and social work. (“Who was involved,” para. 6)

The DSM is a classified system used by psychiatrist and other clinical professions in order to diagnose clients and patients who show signs of some type of disorder. The two advantages of using this model or classification system ranges from the validity of an assessment used by clinicians and other health care professionals. Build around the concepts and purposes for the DSM model is that it supports a number of standard assessments of diagnosing different treatment providers. Furthermore, (Comer, J. 2016) suggest that the DSM-5 requires clinicians to provide both categorical and dimensional information which is part of being consistent in diagnosing. From a categorical perspective this refers to the name of a particular category of a disorder which is indicated on behalf of the client’s symptoms. From the dimensional perspective it is a rating of how the client symptoms and the severity of the dysfunction through various dimensions.

The diagnostic process for personality disorders currently covers a broad scope of various tests and symptoms, causing a source of frustration for psychiatrists (Aldhous). The symptoms and side effects of several personality disorders can tend to blur together, making diagnosis challenging (Aldhous). Most psychiatric patients are diagnosed with several personality disorders at once, with twenty percent of people with personality disorders simply diagnosed with a “personality disorder not otherwise specified” (Aldhous). Using the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health Disorders, commonly referred to as the DSM, psychiatrists attempt with great difficulty to categorize their patients into a specific disorder, only to diagnose

DSM-IV manages the problems by allowing professionals to put patients into broad categories such as the Not Otherwise Specified categories to allow for co-existence of various diagnoses in the same patient (Vieta & Phillips, 2007). However, there is still the problem of comorbidity, where a patient has two disorders (Vieta & Phillips, 2007). In addition, the validity of

According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR), “the essential feature of

Psychopathology is a term, which refers to either the study of mental illness, mental distress or the manifestation of behaviors and experiences, which may be indicators to mental illness, or psychological impairment (Psychopathology, n.d.) Within clinical counseling, the use tends to be in the treatment of mental disorders, the origins or the development of mental disorder. Technologies are being used, as well as have been, developed that require an accurate model, which is always being advanced within the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health Disorders, or the DSM. (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). For example, recent technology includes molecular genetics and mature statistical models. Which will in term assist in attempts to better understand where psychological disorders originate form. Currently, most psychopathology research follows the guidelines based in the fourth edition of the DSM, which assumes that mental disorders

It is sometimes argued that “the creators of DSM-III and DSM-IV sacrificed validity for the sake of reliability”(Wakefield, 1992, cited in Gray, 2002, p 614). This refers to greater emphasis being placed upon superficial symptoms and less upon underlying symptoms and possible cause which could have an important influence upon individuals (Gray, 2002). Since behavior always involve interaction between the individual and their environment, it can be difficult to assess whether the disorder is within the person or whether it is an environmental influence such as a traumatic experience or related to poverty (Gray, 2002, p.612). This can cause problems when diagnosing is extremely difficult to scientifically distinguish between people’s normal responses or whether it is something more (Gray, 2002).

Also in the Introduction a brief history of the DSM-5 is mentioned along with DSM-5 Revision process, Proposals for Revisions, DSM-5 Field Trials, Public and professional review, Expert Review, Organizational structure, Harmonization with ICD-11, Dimension Approach to diagnosis, Developmental and lifespan considerations,

The strengths when working with clients on a medical model perspective is that the use of the DSM provides a common language to use in the medical community. The DSM provides reliability and structural guideline to each mental disorder. The structural guidelines in the DSM provide an organized list of criteria and specifiers to help determine the severity of the mental disorder. When diagnosing a client, there are many similar signs and symptoms to each mental disorder; thus, the DSM provides the clinician information about differential diagnosis, prevalence, possible co-morbidity, age of onset, and progressive development of symptoms. Hence, focusing on the medical model and using the DSM can be beneficial to both the client and the clinician providing treatment.

Being able to form a diagnosis properly for a client is a process that is wide-ranging and broad. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) (American Psychiatric Association [APA], 2013) supports recommendations and standards for identifying a diagnosis for a client. The procedure of diagnosing is more than skimming for symptoms in the DSM; one must assess, interview and identify issues, as well as refer to the DSM for a diagnosis.

This source is a valid source because Barlow and Durand (2015) presented their ideas, claims, and arguments thoroughly and are accompanied by both primary and secondary sources; they also conducted quantitative and qualitative researches which are all accompanied by statistics. Moreover, Barlow has published more than 500 scholarly journals and has written 65 books and clinical manuals. He was also accountable for his participation of the DSM-IV and continued on to be an advisor to the DSM-5 task force. His research interests include the nature and

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) has a number of features. First of all, every disorder is identified using a name and a numerical code. In addition, the manual provides the criteria for diagnosing each disorder as well as establishes subtypes of a disorder and examples that would illustrate the disorder. The manual goes further by addressing the typical age of onset, culturally related information, gender-related information, prevalence of a disorder, typical clinical course of a disorder, typical predisposing factors of a disorder and genetic family patterns of a disease (Summers, 2009). The DSM-IV is a tool that is used by mental health practitioners and social service workers. As has been demonstrated