Introduction
In the psychiatry community, the forthcoming DSM-5 edition has sparked a major debate. The main agenda builds on examining the alterations that will be made in the psychiatric manual targeting diagnosis of patients with mental disorders. Great personalities involved in the debate include Dr. Allen, Dr. Donna, Dr. Kwame and a Historian known as Edward Shorter. The paper below discusses my reactions and thoughts that are linked with the debate.
Dr. Allen starts by pointing out the inordinate risk associated with diagnosis of fake ills with pills. Personally, I think that, the inadequate tools to treat mental disorders are placing psychiatrists under much pressure when making important decisions concerning mental illnesses. There is need for all stakeholders to remain attentive and allocate resources to help solve the issue of shortage. The imbalances that lie within diagnosis of mental disorders have made the changes made in DSM-5 to be adopted very fast without much research. I believe that this has made the situation of moving from the pool of normal to puddle to deteriorate and worsen.
The changes in the 5th edition have created a state of disagreement within experts. In my opinion, I second the evolution of psychology as neuroscience since this creates a platform of brain examination, which will do away with the habit of concentrating with symptoms in offering treatment. When the brain is examined, the chances to offer the correct treatment on time increases promoting quick recovery amongst patients.
Edward Shorter presentation of a 4 minute clip messes up with everything since it increases the controversy linked with the mental health. This can be attributed to diagnosis for Dummies but not real conditions.
I believe that Mark’s contribution is positive since he shares his experience of undergoing treatment of OCD with behavioral therapy. He gives reasons that help the transformation of the pool of normal to be magnified so that all illnesses can be incorporated. This is because most people are proactive in the efforts that are made in fighting mental health problems.
Over a long time, there has been confusion between psychiatric diagnosis and medical science due to the instances of treating physical illnesses without verified evidence. I think that mental illnesses have not yet been verified using scientific proof. It is true to say that many assumptions, theories and misconceptions surround diagnosis of mental illnesses despite the fact that the study of brain chemistry has not been scientifically proven.
People who hear voices of the issues raised in psychiatric diagnosis have claimed the voices cause more difficulties. The treatment of schizophrenia is complicated since a section considers it fatal while other sees it as being well and very normal. Steve Paikin asked that “So, panel, people who hear voices: are they, in the nomenclature of the gentleman, normal?” the answer to this question is a yes since the panelists agrees with it.
In a nutshell, the debate touches the changes to be effected in DSM-5 and opinions of different people are considered. Despite a section of people reacting positively on the knowledge shared by the experts, many people disagree with the opinions. I think that the best solution to be included in diagnosis of psychiatrist mental disorders is the need to come up with procedures and proof in solving certain ailments.
