The real-life TOK issue here is whether or not DSM, the Diagnostic and Statisitical Manual of Mental Disorders, is a manual that is based on fears or fantasies, bad thoughts or bad behaviors. It is said that if the problem is in your head, then it is likely that it’s the DSM, charting the psychic pain. The definitions of this disorder are used to determine whether or not new medication might have an indication for treatment. The DSM is used in a variety of ways.
This article is debatable in the areas of human science and language. The main argument in this article is whether or not the DSM is a reliable and accurate source for diagnosis. Is it right for psychologist to diagnose an patient claiming to have a psychological disorder just because they have similar symptoms corresponding symptoms listed by the DSM? Probably not. This argument arises from the definition of two words, abnormal and normal. Is there really a ‘Platonic’ definition for abnormal and normal? Also, psychological disorders change over time and society depicts what is normal and what is not by following the trend so does that therefore make the definition of normal and abnormal relative? For example, Gladstone explains that the DSM officially listed homosexuality as a mental disorder and then in 1973 removes it. Language is a key factor in this debate, because there’s no ideal definition for normality and abnormality. Gladstone also points out an important note, stating that without a good concrete definition, psychologist can easily say that 84% of New Yorkers have a mental disorder and that everyone can relate a part of themselves with a disorder inside the DSM. This completely destroys the whole purpose of the DSM. Instead of lowering the number of people having mental disorder, the DSM is actually increasing the number of people with a mental disorder by misinterpreting someone normal as someone with abnormality. This raises huge validity and reliability questions on the process of diagnosis since every psychologist’s interpretation of the DSM varies from one another.
The main problem in the article is whether psychologist and psychiatrist should rely on the DSM to diagnose mental disorders in the world. The DSM, Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders is made by a group of psychologist comprising all disorders made at the time. In psychology the terms “normal” and ”abnormal” are highly debatable in their meaning. What is normal in one culture could potentially be “abnormal” in another. For example, looking at a biological aspect what is the normal level of neurotransmitter or hormone activity in the brain? Or what is the normal amount of sadness does someone feel from a break up with their partner. And what is then considered abnormal? In addition, the DSM states possible symptoms of a disorder. Nowadays it is possible to walk down the street at associate at least a few people with a possible disorder in the book of DSM.
The DSM is made from a group of psychologist which possibly means that the diagnoses may come from a bias perspective as it is not a collective opinion of what a disorder should coimprise of in terms of behaviour.
The argument about whether the diagnosis of psychological disorders should be based of the DSM, is very much like the law or the bible. Although the laws that are present are supposed to do good, and bring justice to people, there are always exceptions to the rule. The laws serve to bring safety to society, by imposing laws that take away potential danger. This however, doesn’t mean that if an individual breaks a law that it is instantly considered morally wrong. Such as accidental killing somebody from self defense, if another individual was attempting robbery or rape. In the bible’s case, they are not the exact words of god, but written Jesus’ direct diciples, just like the group of psychologist that wrote the DSM. Therefore when the bibles was written, it was also through the influences of the various disciples. Nowadays Christians use the bible as the basis of living life and how one should act and behave. However many people world wide interpret the bible differently due to their family or community. This is just like how the DSM may be interpreted diffrently by various psychologists due to their background.
No comments:
Post a Comment