Psychiatrists Cast Doubt On Biomedical Model of Mental Illness 329
jones_supa writes "British Psychological Society's division of clinical psychology (DCP) will on Monday issue a statement declaring that, given the lack of evidence, it is time for a 'paradigm shift' in how the issues of mental health are understood. According to their claim, there is no scientific evidence that psychiatric diagnoses such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder are valid or useful. The statement effectively casts doubt on psychiatry's predominantly biomedical model of mental distress – the idea that people are suffering from illnesses that are treatable by doctors using drugs. The DCP said its decision to speak out 'reflects fundamental concerns about the development, personal impact and core assumptions of the (diagnosis) systems', used by psychiatry. The provocative statement by the DCP has been timed to come out shortly before the release of DSM-5, the fifth edition of the American Psychiatry Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. The manual has been attacked for expanding the range of mental health issues that are classified as disorders."
That's crazy. (Score:1, Funny)
Let's just go back to drilling holes.
Re:Would most people be better off undiagnosed? (Score:5, Funny)
Would most people be better off undiagnosed? When it comes to mental "illness", often the only (or at least the best) treatments are behavioral therapy, in which the "illness" is trained away.
I agree. And so do I.
Re:What? (Score:4, Funny)
About three hours? It's currently 3:30 on the east coast of North America so everybody there is still daydreaming off the lunch stupor. The Europeans are home from work or sleeping, and the west coasters are high so they're not attacking anything.
Turf war. (Score:4, Funny)
British Psychological Society's division of clinical psychology says "Psychiatry is bogus"
How much do you want to bet that this is a turf war?
--
BMO
Re:Would most people be better off undiagnosed? (Score:4, Funny)
they doubled down on the meds and he ended up not being able to function on how own (or even hold a conversation) and in a group home.
Post hoc, ergo propter hoc.
quidquid Latine dictum sit altum videtur
Every time I see this pointlessy show-offy use of latin, all I can think of is telling the OP is caput tuum revelle tuo e culo.
(And now we get an endless debate about whether I should have used clunes, and velle rather than revelle, and that's the real reason for the fall of the Roman empire, not the inability to terminate strings but the fact that they spent most of their time arguing over grammar).