Dsm Pros And Cons

1344 Words 6 Pages
This was one of the more noble goals, but it was skewed as well. There are now too many mental disorders to shuffle through in the books, and the symptoms drag on and on. It’s almost impossible for a psychiatrist to scan the manuals to help diagnose a patient in a meeting. The DSMs never take into account an individual; it’s always a group. The people in charge of creating the DSMs did it this way because it is easier to publish, but it leads to more problems about grouping people until everyone loses touch with their own piece of normal. This leads to many people believing that their normal could be the same as everyone else’s, and it should be that way. Some people that helped created these manuals were remorseful about the whole setup, but …show more content…
They don’t have another system to work with, so what else would they use? Ideally, the mental health field wouldn’t need a system, but money and greed are always a part of any industry no matter how pure the industry must be. This industry, out of the many we have, should be one of the most noble, but sadly it is one of the most corrupt. Mental health workers in high status receive a power complex. Some doctors are in for the money when they start prescribing medication. These doctors enjoy Big Pharma and the instability of the definition of normal. These are the doctors that don’t mind the DSMs. The DSMs don’t protect patients, but the book are going to have to start to. The doctors with monetary intentions are louder than the ones who truly want to help. Their voices carry over to drug lobbyists and Big Pharma. And the DSMs are powerless to do anything, the patients are powerless to do anything. Allen Frances, the chair of the DSM-5, describes how he feels about the latest DSM for …show more content…
This is why fighting the DSMs is so tricky. The general public doesn’t really care about any of this unless it’s somehow affecting them. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing. They have to care of their own normal. But, when it comes down to it, this whole fight is basically between mentally ill people alongside the good doctors, and the politicians, bad doctors, and Big Pharma. It’s not particularly an even fight, but it’s important to keep pushing back on the DSMs and everything encompassing the mistreatment of patients. It’s important to remember the patients that can’t fight back, or the patients that had to suffer malicious, violent treatments. These people are still regarded as a group rather than individual stories. This is mainly why these people were mistreated during therapy, or administered violent treatments or simply unnecessary treatments that halted progress. This is why the people that have no grip on reality, their definition has escaped them entirely, need to be acknowledged in the fight because they are usually given up on or tossed aside. The DSMs never advocate for these people, and they never will. The DSMs might have been created to do so at one point, but the manuals have evolved into something that only benefits the ones at the top. The ones that don’t need advocation like the mentally ill truly

Related Documents