Personality Disorders Fact Or Fiction
2 Personality Disordersfact Or Fictionpersonality Disorders Are Chr
Review your text book and a minimum of two peer reviewed references and develop an argument for or against the inclusion of personality disorders as a diagnostic category in the next version of the DSM . Be sure to support your position with relevant research on the causation, diagnosis, and treatment of personality disorders.
Develop your position into a 2-3-page paper in Word format. Apply APA standards to citation of sources and include a cover page and reference page. Use the following file naming convention: LastnameFirstInitial_M4_A2.doc.
Paper For Above instruction
Personality disorders have long been a subject of debate within the mental health community, with some professionals questioning whether they should be classified as distinct mental disorders or merely as maladaptive personality styles. The debate revolves around issues of causation, diagnosis, treatment, and the implications for clinical practice. This essay argues in favor of maintaining personality disorders as a separate diagnostic category in the upcoming edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), emphasizing how a clear classification benefits clinical accuracy, research development, and effective treatment.
The Significance of Classifying Personality Disorders as Mental Disorders
The classification of personality disorders as mental disorders in the DSM enables clinicians to recognize these conditions as enduring patterns of inner experience and behavior that deviate markedly from cultural expectations (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). This formal recognition facilitates standardized diagnosis, guides treatment protocols, and encourages research into their underlying causes. In addition, it provides validation for affected individuals and promotes a better understanding of these complex conditions within society.
Contrary Arguments and Their Limitations
Opponents of diagnosing personality disorders suggest that these behaviors may simply reflect individual personality styles that are culturally or socially influenced (Widiger & Simonsen, 2005). They argue that such behaviors are often pervasive, lifelong traits that do not necessarily indicate pathological conditions deserving of clinical intervention. Some also posit that labeling these traits as disorders may stigmatize individuals and hinder their social integration (Lilienfeld, 2012). However, these arguments often overlook the profound impairment and distress experienced by many individuals with diagnosed personality disorders, as well as the evidence of biological and environmental factors contributing to their development.
Causation, Diagnosis, and Treatment: Supporting Placement in the DSM
Research indicates that personality disorders involve complex interactions between genetic, neurobiological, and environmental factors (Maddux & Winstead, 2016). For instance, studies demonstrate that narcissistic and borderline personality disorders have correlates in brain structure and function, supporting their biological underpinnings (Ruocco et al., 2013). Accurate diagnosis relies on validated criteria, which assist clinicians in differentiating between normative personality traits and pathological patterns. Effective treatment approaches, such as Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) for borderline personality disorder and schema therapy for narcissistic personality disorder, underscore the importance of recognizing these disorders as distinct conditions (Linehan, 2014; Young et al., 2003).
Implications for Future DSM Editions
Retaining personality disorders as a diagnostic category in the DSM enhances clinical communication, promotes research into etiology and treatment, and supports individuals in seeking help. Moving away from this classification could undermine these benefits, leading to inconsistent diagnoses and inadequate treatment strategies. Moreover, an understanding of personality disorders as genuine mental health conditions justifies investment in specialized therapies and intervention programs.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the evidence from scientific research supports the inclusion of personality disorders as a separate diagnostic category in the next DSM edition. Recognizing these conditions as mental disorders facilitates accurate diagnosis, effective treatment, and ongoing research that can improve outcomes for individuals affected. While respecting the diversity of human personalities, it remains essential to distinguish maladaptive patterns that cause significant impairment and distress from normal variations in personality.
References
- American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
- Lilienfeld, S. O. (2012). The Scientific Status of Personality Disorder Diagnoses. Psychological Inquiry, 23(2), 96–105.
- Linehan, M. M. (2014). DBT Skills Training Manual (2nd ed.). Guilford Publications.
- Maddux, J. E., & Winstead, B. A. (2016). Psychopathology: Foundations for a biopsychosocial approach (3rd ed.). Routledge.
- Ruocco, A. C., et al. (2013). Neuroimaging in Borderline Personality Disorder: A review of the literature. Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging, 214(2), 73–80.
- Widiger, T. A., & Simonsen, E. (2005). Alternative dimensional models of personality disorder: An empirical comparison. Journal of Personality Disorders, 19(2), 110-130.
- Young, J. E., Klosko, J. S., & Weishaar, M. E. (2003). Schema therapy: A practitioner's guide. Guilford Publications.