If the basic logic of the DSM is flawed, it should be abandoned. Instead, psychiatrists should move towards a system that looks at an individual’s mental experiences in context, alongside their unique developmental vulnerabilities and strengths, as the main source for analysing and responding to their distress. Diagnosis would no longer name a disorder but map what kinds of support, relationships and learning processes are most likely to help a person regain agency, coherence and a sense of future.

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 hours ago

    but I also think that’s how the APA presents it.

    Well …

    You’re wrong. Sorry to be blunt, but you’re just not getting it

    Abstract The American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) is a classification of mental disorders with associated criteria designed to facilitate more reliable diagnoses of these disorders. Since a complete description of the underlying pathological processes is not possible for most mental disorders, it is important to emphasize that the current diagnostic criteria are the best available description of how mental disorders are expressed and can be recognized by trained clinicians. DSM is intended to serve as a practical, functional, and flexible guide for organizing information that can aid in the accurate diagnosis and treatment of mental disorders. It is a tool for clinicians, an essential educational resource for students and practitioners, and a reference for researchers in the field. (PsycInfo Database Record © 2025 APA, all rights reserved)

    https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2013-14907-000

    Like, the APA can’t be more explicit that the DSM is not what you think it is…

    And you just fucking insist that we take your word on what they say it is

    But you’re wrong.

    There’s nothing to debate here, there’s no discussion or interpretation.

    That’s the abstract for the DSM written by the APA. I have no idea where you are getting the shit you’re saying from.

    • Randomgal@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      You are talking to a bot. That’s why it missed an obvious keyword in your initial message. ‘somehow’