In a world expecting greater and greater transparency in how important medical and mental health research is conducted, should such transparency extend to the intricate workings of determining what constitutes a valid mental disorder diagnosis?
That’s the question posed by two sides wrangling over how transparent …
Before posting, please read our blog moderation guidelines. The comments below begin with the oldest comments first. Click on the last comments page to jump to the most recent comments.
Before posting, please read our blog moderation guidelines.
Post a Comment:
Copyright © 1995-2013 Psych Central. All rights reserved.
Site last updated: 19 May 2013
|
It’s a sad commentary when refinement of a tool as important as the DSM is cloaked in secrecy. It is akin to partisanship in politics and corporate egocentrism. If “mental health” professionals can not set aside self-interests and cooperate in the DSM’s formulation in a humane, profession-centered way–calling upon the best and brightest in mental health fields–it makes a mockery out of the fields they profess to practice.
Yeah, there is no real easy answer- even on the selection of who will be on the task force/ workgroups, you can learn more about the people selected at http://www.psych.org/dsmv.asp