"To read about the evolution of the DSM is to know this: It
is an entirely political document. What it includes, what it does
not include, are the result of intensive campaigning, lengthy negotiating,
infighting, and power plays."
- Louise Armstrong, And They Call It Help: The Psychiatric
Policing of America's Children
|This section is included because it is referenced in other of our pages.
The text below is taken directly from the Fourth Edition of the DSM-IV,
copyright 1994, printed in 1997. Realize that psychiatry seems to make
sense within it's own limited framework of nomenclature and definitions,
but then again so do all mythologies, and the fault with psychiatry is
not logical inconsistencies within the field, but severely flawed
basic assumptions about man, his mind, his behavior, life, the environment
and the relationships between these things. Psychiatric methods have been
and continue to be harmful to Man and society.
See below for a list of psychiatric groups which support the DSM-IV.
It is safe to say these are each front groups for large money interests,
despite how they may present themselves to the general public. Many psychiatric
"groups" and "associations" function as trade unions for the psychiatrists
and as a source of continual advertising for the major drug companies.
These trade unions exist solely to benefit the psychiatrists and the field
as a whole.
DSM-IV: DIAGNOSTIC AND STATISTICAL
MANUAL OF MENTAL DISORDERS
This is the fourth edition of the American Psychiatric Association's
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or DSM-IV.
The utility and credibility of DSM-IV require that it focus on its
clinical, research, and educational purposes and be supported by an extensive
empirical foundation. Our highest priority has been to provide a helpful
guide to clinical practice. We hoped to make DSM-IV practical and
useful for clinicians by striving for brevity of criteria sets, clarity
of language, and explicit statements of the constructs embodied in the
diagnostic criteria. An additional goal was to facilitate research and
improve communication among clinicians and researchers. We were also mindful
of the use of DSM-IV for improving the collection of clinical information
and as an educational tool for teaching psychopathology.
An official nomenclature must be applicable in a wide diversity of contexts.
DSM-IV is used by clinicians and researchers of many different orientations
(e.g., biological, psychodynamic, cognitive, behavioral, interpersonal,
family/systems). It is used by psychiatrists, other physicians, psychologists,
social workers, nurses, occupational and rehabilitation therapists, counselors,
and other health and mental health professionals. DSM-IV must be
usable across settings - inpatient, outpatient, partial hospital, consultation
- liaison, clinic, private practice, and primary care, and with community
populations. It is also a necessary tool for collecting and communicating
accurate public health statistics. Fortunately, all these many uses are
compatible with one another.
|In this way psychiatry puts forth the the "bible" of "mental illness".
This book is used by every field mentioned above as the guideline for understanding
and categorizing "mental disorders". It also has the effect of setting
the stage for accepted terminology, constructs, and basic viewpoints on
the subject. A nomenclature, by it's very nature, sets the pattern for
how any subject is perceived and understood. But also, it is not always
so much what is said in the DSM, as what is implied and not said.
The entire system of thought "makes sense" within it's own framework.
But being "logically consistent" implies nothing about truth, relation
to actual existing things, workability or quality of results. To read more
about how a subject can be "logical" and "make sense", yet have absolutely
nothing with observable reality see the essay Reality,
Belief and the Mind.
There are obviously many possible ways for a person, their mind, and
their dealings with the world around them to be less than perfect (I choose
to describe it this way instead of as "mental illness" or "disorders").
Observing and categorizing some of them, as the DSM has done, in
no way implies understanding of causes or cures. Obviously, if the cause
of something isn't understood, it is unlikely that any cure derived from
the same "method" can be useful or effective. Those responsible for putting
the DSM together admit this themselves. Psychiatry would like there
to be medical and biochemical solutions (i.e drugs) to all the many listed
"mental disorders", but that is extreme wishful thinking and impossible,
because so many "mental disorders" have absolutely no observable cause
in biology or chemistry. They say the causes are physiological and
biological, but they have never observed this fact anywhere, except in
their own fantasies and "professional" biases.
Underlying the entire approach to the DSM-IV are the ideas that
the mind and human behavior is completely understood and explained by biochemistry
and physiology (and environmental factors).
It isn't understood at all on this level and the psychiatric field's
posturing along these lines is pure theatrics. There are no proven genes
causing any mental condition, and no detectable chemical imbalance in any
brain leading to a mental disorder. These are both only theories with
absolutely no basis in verifiable fact. They may be very popular
theories, but this implies nothing else. Popularity has NEVER implied truth
or validity of that which is popular. This is extremely true in this case.
The "mind" is mentioned often in the context of various "mental disorders".
Phrases such as "lowered attention", "impaired memory", and "cognitive
reduction" are used solely as symptoms to excuse the diagnosis of some
purported "mental illness". One gets the idea while reading the DSM-IV
that "they obviously know about the mind because they talk about it so
much". Make the effort to observe what they say and how they say it. There
is NO analysis of the mind as a thing in itself, no attempt to understand
a mind and it's functioning, and no attempt to positively influence and
help a mind directly through therapy or other techniques.
The mind is USED and appealed to only as one of the categories of things
wrong with a person to justify some psychiatric label for an "illness"
or "disorder". "Weakened attention span" might be one of the criteria used
to justify a label of depression or anxiety disorder. But the faculty of
attention in a person, as a quality of a mind, as a
function of any mind with tendencies, characteristics and potentials,
is never examined or understood with an intention to develop means
to improve or control attention. To the psychiatrists, you
simply "have " attention, and if it's not "good" or "acceptable" it must
be due to some "mental disease". They do the same things with students
and learning. To them "learning" just exists. If you are a good student
and can learn, lucky you. But if you are a slow or troubled student, you
must have a "learning disability" or some "mental disorder". No one ever
thinks to ask, "well, did anyone ever teach little Billy how to study?"
This should seem glaringly unusual, but the supposed "sciences" of modern
education (which is now all run by behavioral engineering and psychiatry)
have never investigated, much less come up with a workable method of study
for children, able to be taught so as to improve any student's ability
to study and learn. To them, you either can study, or you have a "mental
disease". These people are the most pretentious, dull and poor excuse for
a "professional" I have ever encountered!
This is equally true for every other aspect of mind mentioned in the
book. Simply, psychiatry, as elucidated in this DSM-IV, the "bible"
of modern psychiatry, has absolutely no understanding of the human mind,
no way to address it, and no way to help and improve it. They pretend
to this understanding and ability, but this is 100% pretense.
An even larger joke is that the DSM is presented as a comprehensive
guide for diagnosing "mental illness". What does it matter what the diagnosis
is? The only solution modern psychiatry ever offers is DRUGS, DRUGS and
MORE DRUGS. Or worse, electric shock and
brain butchery. These barbaric and
ineffective "treatments" derive directly from the medical orthodoxy that
the mind & personality = chemical reactions in the brain. This is completely
wrong, and so are the solutions offered to the problems outlined in the
It's not that the various problems with minds and people don't exist.
They do. And it's not that they don't exist in many ways as described in
the DSM. They do. What doesn't exist, but is assumed and
believed to exist, is the absurd notion that man is solely a biological
entity, able to be understood in all his facets by chemistry, biology and
physiology alone. The "mind" has been ignored and neglected, and Man along
with it. This has had disastrous results to Man and society wherever psychiatry
has reared it's ugly head.
DSM-IV was the product of 13 Work Groups (see Appendix J), each
of which had primary responsibility for a section of the manual. This organization
was designed to increase participation by experts in each of the respective
fields. We took a number of precautions to ensure that the Work Group recommendations
would reflect the breadth of available evidence and opinion and not just
the views of the specific members. After extensive consultations with experts
and clinicians in each field, we selected Work Group members who represented
a wide range of perspectives and experiences. Work Group members were instructed
that they were to participate as consensus scholars and not as advocates
of previously held views. Furthermore, we established a formal evidence
based process for the Work Groups to follow.
The Work Groups reported to the Task Force on DSM-IV (see p.
ix), which consisted of 27 members, many of whom also chaired a Work Group.
Each of the 13 Work Groups was composed of 5 (or more) members whose reviews
were critiqued by between 50 and 100 advisers, who were also chosen to
represent diverse clinical and research expertise, disciplines, backgrounds,
and settings. The involvement of many international experts ensured that
DSM-IV had available the widest pool of information and would be
applicable across cultures. Conferences and workshops were held to provide
conceptual and methodological guidance for the DSM-IV effort. These
included a number of consultations between the developers of DSM-IV
and the developers of ICD-10 conducted for the purpose of increasing compatibility
between the two systems. Also held were methods conferences that focused
on cultural factors in the diagnosis of mental disorder, on geriatric diagnosis,
and on psychiatric diagnosis in primary care settings.
To maintain open and extensive lines of communication, the Task Force
on DSM-IV established a liaison with many other components within
the American Psychiatric Association and with more than 60
organizations and associations interested in the development of DSM-IV
(e.g., American Health Information Management Association,
American Nurses' Association, American Occupational Therapy Association,
American Psychoanalytic Association, American Psychological Association,
American Psychological Society, Coalition for the Family, Group for the
Advancement of Psychiatry, National Association of Social Workers, National
Center for Health Statistics, World Health Organization). We attempted
to air issues and empirical evidence early in the process in order to identify
potential problems and differences in interpretation. Exchanges of information
were also made possible through the distribution of a semiannual newsletter
(the DSM-IV Update), the publication of a regular column on DSM-IV
in Hospital and Community Psychiatry, frequent presentations at national
and international conferences, and numerous journal articles.
Two years before the publication of DSM-IV, the Task Force published
and widely distributed the DSM-IV Options Book. This volume presented
a comprehensive summary of the alternative proposals that were being considered
for inclusion in DSM-IV in order to solicit opinion and additional
data for our deliberations. We received extensive correspondence from interested
individuals who shared with us additional data and recommendations on the
potential impact of the possible changes in DSM-IV on their clinical
practice, teaching, research, and administrative work. This breadth of
discussion helped us to anticipate problems and to attempt to find the
best solution among the various options. One year before the publication
of DSM-IV, a near-final draft of the proposed criteria sets was
distributed to allow for one last critique.
In arriving at final DSM-IV decisions, the Work Groups and the
Task Force reviewed all of the extensive empirical evidence and correspondence
that had been gathered. It is our belief that the major innovation of DSM-IV
lies not in any of its specific content changes but rather in the systematic
and explicit process by which it was constructed and documented. More than
any other nomenclature of mental disorders, DSM-IV is grounded in
|Read first hand for yourself and discover the true nature of psychiatry
as a very complicated modern mythology
masquerading as "true science". Where else would one find "coffee drinking"
(292.9 Caffeine-Related Disorder) turned into a mental illness! Smoking
is now classified as a mental illness also! You'll find it under category
305.10 Nicotine Dependence, and 292.0 Nicotine Withdrawal. Yes, smoking
has an addictive aspect. But no, drug addiction via smoking is not a mental
illness! It's simply drug addiction - the reaction physically and mentally
to drug taking. "Withdrawal" is a physiological reaction a person experiences
when they stop taking a drug. It is also not a mental illness! Of course,
the more "mental illnesses" the psychiatric field can "fabricate" and place
in the DSM, the more coverage insurance companies will provide to
psychiatrists and drug companies as insurance companies use the DSM
as their main source for ascertaining the "legitimacy" of a "mental illness".
published by the American Psychiatric Association
Say You're Crazy: How the World's Most Powerful Psychiatrists Decide Who's
Normal by Paula J. Caplan, Ph.D.
Us Crazy: DSM: The Psychiatric Bible and the Creation of Mental Disorders
by Herb Kutchins, Stuart A. Kirk
Myth of Mental Illness: Foundations of a Theory of Personal Conduct
by Thomas S. Szasz, M.D., Professor
Liberty, and Psychiatry : An Inquiry into the Social Uses of Mental Health
Practices by Thomas S. Szasz, M.D., Professor
Casebook: A Learning Companion to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual
of Mental Disorders by Robert L. Spitzer, Miriam Gibbon, Andrew
E. Skodol, Michael B. First
Made Easy: The Clinician's Guide to Diagnosis by James Morrison
Criteria from DSM-IV (4th Ed) by John S. McIntyre
Back to Main DSM-IV Page
Back to Main SNTP Page
Truth in all subjects...
|©Gene Zimmer 1999 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED