robrs511 karma2013-04-30 18:27:05 UTC
Sure the DSM-V has its problems, and its certainly been a tumultuous process in the making, but we are talking about an area (psychology) that is young and still in development....medicine has a stronger aura of clear diagnosis but they too are often incorrect in diagnosis or discover new explanations for things. Why should an update to a manual that is based in new research discoveries be a bad thing? What are you offerring as the alternative solution?
While you are right to state that the APA oversees development and production of the DSM, your evilization of them is a bit of a stretch to me. How do you reconcile the many good intentioned researchers, therapists, and patient-organizations, who have been heavily and importantly involved in the process?
View HistoryShare Link
robrs56 karma2013-04-30 18:38:58 UTC
Also: Can you speak to what good you feel your book does? In a profession where help-seeking behavior is low, skepticism and misunderstanding/information is high, how does your book make things better?
Copyright © 2014 BestofAMA.com, All rights reserved.
reddit has not approved or endorsed BestofAMA, reddit design elements are trademarks of reddit inc.