Debating DSM-5: diagnosis and the sociology of critique

The development of the fifth edition of the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders—the DSM-5—has reenergised and driven further forward critical discourse about the place and role of diagnosis in mental health. The DSM-5 has attracted considerab...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of medical ethics 2014-08, Vol.40 (8), p.521-525
Main Author: Pickersgill, Martyn D
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Blogs
Criticism
Debates
Demand side management
Depressive disorders
Diagnosis
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
Diseases
Disorders
Health Services Needs and Demand
Humans
Medical personnel
Medical sociology
Mental disorders
Mental Disorders - classification
Mental Disorders - diagnosis
Mental health
Mental illness
Methods
Political debate
Practice guidelines (Medicine)
Psychiatric diagnosis
Psychiatric Status Rating Scales
Psychiatry
Psychometrics
Responses to DSM-5
Social aspects
Sociology
Task forces
United States
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b540t-8b5d79629d7e30d97c8548672225957121a6dc07cc342bf61a2486e83ac27b1b3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b540t-8b5d79629d7e30d97c8548672225957121a6dc07cc342bf61a2486e83ac27b1b3
container_end_page 525
container_issue 8
container_start_page 521
container_title Journal of medical ethics
container_volume 40
creator Pickersgill, Martyn D
description The development of the fifth edition of the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders—the DSM-5—has reenergised and driven further forward critical discourse about the place and role of diagnosis in mental health. The DSM-5 has attracted considerable criticism, not least about its role in processes of medicalisation. This paper suggests the need for a sociology of psychiatric critique. Sociological analysis can help map fields of contention, and cast fresh light on the assumptions and nuances of debate around the DSM-5; it underscores the importance of diagnosis to the governance of social and clinical life, as well as the wider discourses critical commentaries connect with and are activated by. More normatively, a sociology of critique can indicate which interests and values are structuring the dialogues being articulated, and just how diverse clinical opinion regarding the DSM can actually be. This has implications for the considerations of health services and policy decision-makers who might look to such debates for guidance.
doi_str_mv 10.1136/medethics-2013-101762
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4112449</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A379199141</galeid><jstor_id>43283060</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>A379199141</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-b540t-8b5d79629d7e30d97c8548672225957121a6dc07cc342bf61a2486e83ac27b1b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkc1uEzEUhS1ERdPAIxSNxIaNqa__zQKpSgtUKuoCWFsejzNxNBmXsYPo2-NoSgRd4Y0X37nH9_ggdA7kHQCTF7vQhbKJPmNKgGEgoCR9hhbAFcOcCvUcLQgjEktNyCk6y3lL6qHavECnlDOqmBILpK5C60oc--bq6xcs3jdddP2YcsyNG7umbEKTk49pSP1Dk9aNn2KJP_bhJTpZuyGHV4_3En3_eP1t9Rnf3n26WV3e4lZwUrBuRaeMpKZTgZHOKK8F11JRSoURCig42XmivGectmsJjlYcNHOeqhZatkQfZt_7fVsj-zCWyQ32foo7Nz3Y5KL9l4xxY_v003IAyrmpBm8fDaZU987F7mL2YRjcGNI-WxBcUpC8fuISvXki3ab9NNZ4FpQGYjSTtKrwrOrdEGwcfRpL-FV8GobQB1vTr-7sJVMGjAF-cBWz3k8p5ymsj8sDsYcq7bFKe6jSzlXWudd_Jz9O_emuCs5nwTaXNB15xbr2TionM2932_988zeLO7Jr</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1781098362</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Debating DSM-5: diagnosis and the sociology of critique</title><source>Art, Design and Architecture Collection</source><source>JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection</source><source>Social Science Premium Collection</source><creator>Pickersgill, Martyn D</creator><creatorcontrib>Pickersgill, Martyn D</creatorcontrib><description>The development of the fifth edition of the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders—the DSM-5—has reenergised and driven further forward critical discourse about the place and role of diagnosis in mental health. The DSM-5 has attracted considerable criticism, not least about its role in processes of medicalisation. This paper suggests the need for a sociology of psychiatric critique. Sociological analysis can help map fields of contention, and cast fresh light on the assumptions and nuances of debate around the DSM-5; it underscores the importance of diagnosis to the governance of social and clinical life, as well as the wider discourses critical commentaries connect with and are activated by. More normatively, a sociology of critique can indicate which interests and values are structuring the dialogues being articulated, and just how diverse clinical opinion regarding the DSM can actually be. This has implications for the considerations of health services and policy decision-makers who might look to such debates for guidance.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0306-6800</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1473-4257</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2013-101762</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24327375</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JMETDR</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: BMJ Publishing Group</publisher><subject>Blogs ; Criticism ; Debates ; Demand side management ; Depressive disorders ; Diagnosis ; Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders ; Diseases ; Disorders ; Health Services Needs and Demand ; Humans ; Medical personnel ; Medical sociology ; Mental disorders ; Mental Disorders - classification ; Mental Disorders - diagnosis ; Mental health ; Mental illness ; Methods ; Political debate ; Practice guidelines (Medicine) ; Psychiatric diagnosis ; Psychiatric Status Rating Scales ; Psychiatry ; Psychometrics ; Responses to DSM-5 ; Social aspects ; Sociology ; Task forces ; United States</subject><ispartof>Journal of medical ethics, 2014-08, Vol.40 (8), p.521-525</ispartof><rights>Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions</rights><rights>2014 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and the Institute of Medical Ethics</rights><rights>Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.</rights><rights>Copyright: 2014 Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions</rights><rights>Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions 2014</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-b540t-8b5d79629d7e30d97c8548672225957121a6dc07cc342bf61a2486e83ac27b1b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-b540t-8b5d79629d7e30d97c8548672225957121a6dc07cc342bf61a2486e83ac27b1b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/1781098362/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/1781098362?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,12861,21394,27924,27925,33611,33612,34775,34776,43733,44200,58238,58471,74221,74728</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24327375$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Pickersgill, Martyn D</creatorcontrib><title>Debating DSM-5: diagnosis and the sociology of critique</title><title>Journal of medical ethics</title><addtitle>J Med Ethics</addtitle><description>The development of the fifth edition of the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders—the DSM-5—has reenergised and driven further forward critical discourse about the place and role of diagnosis in mental health. The DSM-5 has attracted considerable criticism, not least about its role in processes of medicalisation. This paper suggests the need for a sociology of psychiatric critique. Sociological analysis can help map fields of contention, and cast fresh light on the assumptions and nuances of debate around the DSM-5; it underscores the importance of diagnosis to the governance of social and clinical life, as well as the wider discourses critical commentaries connect with and are activated by. More normatively, a sociology of critique can indicate which interests and values are structuring the dialogues being articulated, and just how diverse clinical opinion regarding the DSM can actually be. This has implications for the considerations of health services and policy decision-makers who might look to such debates for guidance.</description><subject>Blogs</subject><subject>Criticism</subject><subject>Debates</subject><subject>Demand side management</subject><subject>Depressive disorders</subject><subject>Diagnosis</subject><subject>Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders</subject><subject>Diseases</subject><subject>Disorders</subject><subject>Health Services Needs and Demand</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Medical personnel</subject><subject>Medical sociology</subject><subject>Mental disorders</subject><subject>Mental Disorders - classification</subject><subject>Mental Disorders - diagnosis</subject><subject>Mental health</subject><subject>Mental illness</subject><subject>Methods</subject><subject>Political debate</subject><subject>Practice guidelines (Medicine)</subject><subject>Psychiatric diagnosis</subject><subject>Psychiatric Status Rating Scales</subject><subject>Psychiatry</subject><subject>Psychometrics</subject><subject>Responses to DSM-5</subject><subject>Social aspects</subject><subject>Sociology</subject><subject>Task forces</subject><subject>United States</subject><issn>0306-6800</issn><issn>1473-4257</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>9YT</sourceid><sourceid>ALSLI</sourceid><sourceid>K50</sourceid><sourceid>M1D</sourceid><sourceid>M2R</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkc1uEzEUhS1ERdPAIxSNxIaNqa__zQKpSgtUKuoCWFsejzNxNBmXsYPo2-NoSgRd4Y0X37nH9_ggdA7kHQCTF7vQhbKJPmNKgGEgoCR9hhbAFcOcCvUcLQgjEktNyCk6y3lL6qHavECnlDOqmBILpK5C60oc--bq6xcs3jdddP2YcsyNG7umbEKTk49pSP1Dk9aNn2KJP_bhJTpZuyGHV4_3En3_eP1t9Rnf3n26WV3e4lZwUrBuRaeMpKZTgZHOKK8F11JRSoURCig42XmivGectmsJjlYcNHOeqhZatkQfZt_7fVsj-zCWyQ32foo7Nz3Y5KL9l4xxY_v003IAyrmpBm8fDaZU987F7mL2YRjcGNI-WxBcUpC8fuISvXki3ab9NNZ4FpQGYjSTtKrwrOrdEGwcfRpL-FV8GobQB1vTr-7sJVMGjAF-cBWz3k8p5ymsj8sDsYcq7bFKe6jSzlXWudd_Jz9O_emuCs5nwTaXNB15xbr2TionM2932_988zeLO7Jr</recordid><startdate>20140801</startdate><enddate>20140801</enddate><creator>Pickersgill, Martyn D</creator><general>BMJ Publishing Group</general><general>BMJ Publishing Group Ltd</general><general>BMJ Publishing Group LTD</general><scope>9YT</scope><scope>ACMMV</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>AABKS</scope><scope>ABSDQ</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AVQMV</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BTHHO</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K50</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1D</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140801</creationdate><title>Debating DSM-5: diagnosis and the sociology of critique</title><author>Pickersgill, Martyn D</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b540t-8b5d79629d7e30d97c8548672225957121a6dc07cc342bf61a2486e83ac27b1b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Blogs</topic><topic>Criticism</topic><topic>Debates</topic><topic>Demand side management</topic><topic>Depressive disorders</topic><topic>Diagnosis</topic><topic>Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders</topic><topic>Diseases</topic><topic>Disorders</topic><topic>Health Services Needs and Demand</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Medical personnel</topic><topic>Medical sociology</topic><topic>Mental disorders</topic><topic>Mental Disorders - classification</topic><topic>Mental Disorders - diagnosis</topic><topic>Mental health</topic><topic>Mental illness</topic><topic>Methods</topic><topic>Political debate</topic><topic>Practice guidelines (Medicine)</topic><topic>Psychiatric diagnosis</topic><topic>Psychiatric Status Rating Scales</topic><topic>Psychiatry</topic><topic>Psychometrics</topic><topic>Responses to DSM-5</topic><topic>Social aspects</topic><topic>Sociology</topic><topic>Task forces</topic><topic>United States</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Pickersgill, Martyn D</creatorcontrib><collection>British Medical Journal Open Access Journals</collection><collection>BMJ Journals:Open Access</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Philosophy Collection</collection><collection>Philosophy Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>Arts Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>BMJ Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Art, Design and Architecture Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Arts &amp; Humanities Database</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of medical ethics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Pickersgill, Martyn D</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Debating DSM-5: diagnosis and the sociology of critique</atitle><jtitle>Journal of medical ethics</jtitle><addtitle>J Med Ethics</addtitle><date>2014-08-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>40</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>521</spage><epage>525</epage><pages>521-525</pages><issn>0306-6800</issn><eissn>1473-4257</eissn><coden>JMETDR</coden><abstract>The development of the fifth edition of the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders—the DSM-5—has reenergised and driven further forward critical discourse about the place and role of diagnosis in mental health. The DSM-5 has attracted considerable criticism, not least about its role in processes of medicalisation. This paper suggests the need for a sociology of psychiatric critique. Sociological analysis can help map fields of contention, and cast fresh light on the assumptions and nuances of debate around the DSM-5; it underscores the importance of diagnosis to the governance of social and clinical life, as well as the wider discourses critical commentaries connect with and are activated by. More normatively, a sociology of critique can indicate which interests and values are structuring the dialogues being articulated, and just how diverse clinical opinion regarding the DSM can actually be. This has implications for the considerations of health services and policy decision-makers who might look to such debates for guidance.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>BMJ Publishing Group</pub><pmid>24327375</pmid><doi>10.1136/medethics-2013-101762</doi><tpages>5</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0306-6800
ispartof Journal of medical ethics, 2014-08, Vol.40 (8), p.521-525
issn 0306-6800
1473-4257
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4112449
source Art, Design and Architecture Collection; JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection; Social Science Premium Collection
subjects Blogs
Criticism
Debates
Demand side management
Depressive disorders
Diagnosis
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
Diseases
Disorders
Health Services Needs and Demand
Humans
Medical personnel
Medical sociology
Mental disorders
Mental Disorders - classification
Mental Disorders - diagnosis
Mental health
Mental illness
Methods
Political debate
Practice guidelines (Medicine)
Psychiatric diagnosis
Psychiatric Status Rating Scales
Psychiatry
Psychometrics
Responses to DSM-5
Social aspects
Sociology
Task forces
United States
title Debating DSM-5: diagnosis and the sociology of critique
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T19%3A24%3A19IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Debating%20DSM-5:%20diagnosis%20and%20the%20sociology%20of%20critique&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20medical%20ethics&rft.au=Pickersgill,%20Martyn%20D&rft.date=2014-08-01&rft.volume=40&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=521&rft.epage=525&rft.pages=521-525&rft.issn=0306-6800&rft.eissn=1473-4257&rft.coden=JMETDR&rft_id=info:doi/10.1136/medethics-2013-101762&rft_dat=%3Cgale_pubme%3EA379199141%3C/gale_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b540t-8b5d79629d7e30d97c8548672225957121a6dc07cc342bf61a2486e83ac27b1b3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1781098362&rft_id=info:pmid/24327375&rft_galeid=A379199141&rft_jstor_id=43283060&rfr_iscdi=true