|
|
5 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
DSM-IV: Neither Truth nor Tripe, March 21, 1998
By A Customer
The DSM-IV has taken its share of knocks recently, perhapsmost powerfully from Herb Kutchins, and Stuart A. Kirk in Making UsCrazy : DSM : The Psychiatric Bible and the Creation of Mental Disorders (Free Press, 1997). Yet virtually nobody involved in any of the helping/human service professions can afford to practice without the DSM-IV, or one of its spin-offs, on his or her desk. It is rumored that lawyers have bought more copies than psychiatrists, but the American Psychiatric Press isn't telling. Full of flaws, contradictions, and sheer nonsensicalities, the DSM-IV nonetheless stands as the best the scientific world has devised in describing and diagnosing mental illnesses. People who don't believe in mental illness, who think most psychiatrists are stranger than their patients, or who think that meditation, oriental massage, or past life regression are all the solutions we need to human problems will find no comfort in the DSM-IV. Neither will those who don't consider a science to be real unless its state of development permits its concepts to be expressed in equations rather than mere language. But in a world full of nervous, despondent, deluded, nasty, selfish, withdrawn, and otherwise troubled and troublesome folks, the DSM-IV, imperfect as are the people it describes and who compiled it, is the best guide we have in trying to make sense of it all. ^M^MA 14 year old boy is depressed. Is it just a phase, or is it serious enough to require medication to prevent his suicide? A 57 year old woman starts believing that her neighbors are pumping poison gas into her apartment. Does she need a gas mask, reassurance, brain surgery, or Prozac? A 30 year old woman is fondled in a supermarket and wants five million dollars from the store's owners for the emotional suffering she will experience for the rest of her life. Is she re-experiencing traumatic episodes of childhood abuse or is she a swindler? Stunningly important questions, all. Do we have perfect answers? No way. But do we need help in grappling with them? We sure do. ^M^MThe DSM-IV is powerfully political, full of bad science, and is probably over-valued in every setting in which it isused. Yet it represents the best summary of the work of thousands of people, all struggling to solve some of the most crucial problems we face in medicine, psychology, law, and social welfare. We need the DSM-IV critics, but we also need the DSM-IV.
|