From Psychiatric News:
Paul Chodoff, M.D.
Washington, D.C.
I would like to suggest a new diagnostic entity for DSM-V. The diagnosis is "the human condition." Diagnostic criteria would be any combination of the following:
For children: (1) distractability, (2) being fidgety, (3) disobedience, (4) disliking school. For adults: (1) unhappiness, (2) nervousness, (3) shyness, (4) dissatisfaction with one's looks, (5) dissatisfaction with one's sexual performance, (6) getting angry, (7) playing the horses, (8) getting upset when things go wrong, (9) preferring one's own company, (10) showing off, and (11) orderliness.
The advantages of this diagnosis are that it would facilitate insurance reimbursement, dispose of the bothersome problem of comorbidity, and encourage the quest for a drug to cure the disorder of being human.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Bravo!
Every edition of DSM is bigger and more convoluted with more lables to diagnose with. Everyday life is not pathology. Sadness is part of the spectrum of healthy emotions. So is anger. Some things are sad. Others should piss you off. I also agree on the insurance get paid thing. And don't forget the Drug Industry. Everyone needs one of these chemicals, preferable several. But only those still on patent doctor...
This is beautiful. I'm linking to it asap!
I'm Dr. Chodoff's granddaughter and I'm thrilled to see his suggestions being taken as they are intended! He was showing off a letter PN published suggested that his new DSM entry be called Chodoff's Syndrome. A pervasive and incurable condition, no doubt. He'll be ticked to hear about this blog and people's reactions to his quote.
I'm Dr. Chodoff's granddaughter and I'm thrilled to see his suggestions being taken as they are intended! He was showing off a letter PN published suggested that his new DSM entry be called Chodoff's Syndrome. A pervasive and incurable condition, no doubt. He'll be tickled to hear about this blog and people's reactions to his quote.
That's supposed to be *tickled* in the last line of my comment, not *ticked*.
The Diagnostics and Statistical Manual, the Shrink's bible, has been around for over 50 years, and now possibly contains nearly 300 mental disorders. Many are created and added to the DSM as each new edition is created. On occasion, a mental disorder is deleted from the DSM, such as homosexuality in the early 1970s.
Published by the APA, it is also used, I understand, for seeking mental diagnostic criteria to assure reimbursement. The DSM is also often used as a reference to validate suspected assessments by the psychiatrist and the DSM is organized by the following:
I- Mental disorders
II- mental conditions
III- Physical disorders/syndromes, medical conditions (co-morbidity)
IV- Mental disorder suspected etiology
V- Pediatric assessments
The APA is creating the next DSM, DSM-V, and has had its task force members assigned to this next DSM edition sign non-disclosure agreements, which is rather absurd and pointless. Lack of transparency equals lack of credibility because of these agreements of the content of the next DSM. It opposes any recovery model necessary regarding such disorders, I believe.
The DSM should be evaluated by another unrelated task force or a peer review of sorts to assure objectivity. This is particularly of concern presently, as many more are diagnosed with mental dysfunctions presently at an alarming rate- children in particular,
Dan Abshear
Post a Comment