How do pscyhiatrists decide some people are ‘disordered’? Well, some of them want to keep their methods a secret. It sure makes me more interested in what they are hiding. See excerpt and link to full article below.
Wrangling Over Psychiatry’s Bible
By Christopher Lane Los Angeles Times November 16, 2008
Over the summer, a wrangle between eminent psychiatrists that had been brewing for months erupted in print. Startled readers of Psychiatric News saw the spectacle unfold in the journal’s normally less-dramatic pages. The bone of contention: whether the next revision of America’s psychiatric bible, the “Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders,” should be done openly and transparently so mental health professionals and the public could follow along, or whether the debates should be held in secret.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-lane16-2008nov16,0,5678764.sto
Tags: DSM IV, mental health, psychiatry
November 20, 2008 at 1:14 pm |
Ok, I am JUST an Economist, but what exactly is wrong with transparency?
I thought Psychiatry and studies with regard to psychiatry and psychology had to be transparent. I thought it was because of a few ’scary’ studies in Psychology done years back that the whole ‘transparency’ thing really became an ethical issue and why all research (at least at Universities) requires a brief training on ethics in disclosure to study participants.
I thought paitients had a right to their records, diagnosis, and methods used to reach the diagnosis (how else can they get a 2nd opinon?). If a person is mentally not capable for this responsibility then the responsibility would fall with their guardian.
No, I didn’t read the full article– I’d rather listen to Didly esplain it to me.