Please No Plagiarism And Make Sure You Can Access Al 942359
Please No Plagiarism And Make Sure You Are Able To Access All Resource
Please no plagiarism and make sure you are able to access all resources on your own before you bid. You need to have scholarly support for any claim of fact or recommendation regarding treatment. Grammar, Writing, and APA Format: I expect you to write professionally, which means APA format, complete sentences, proper paragraphs, and well-organized and well-documented presentation of ideas. Remember to use scholarly research from peer-reviewed articles that is current. Sources such as Wikipedia, Ask.com, PsychCentral, and similar sites are never acceptable.
Please follow the instructions to get full credit for the discussion. I need this completed by 09/07/20 at 5pm. Discussion - Week 2 Developing the Classification System of Disorders If you were to give a box of 100 different photographs to 10 people and ask them to sort them into groups, it is very unlikely that all 10 people will sort them into the exact same groups. However, if you were to give them a series of questions or a classification system to use, the chances that all 10 people sort them exactly the same increases depending on the specificity of the system and the knowledge of those sorting the implements. This is not unlike what has occurred in the process of classifying mental disorders.
A system that provides enough specificity to appropriately classify a large variety of mental disorders while also attempting to include all of the possible symptoms, many of which can change over time, is a daunting task when used by a variety of specialists, doctors, and other professionals with varied experience, cultures, expertise, and beliefs. The DSM has undergone many transformations since it was first published in 1952. Many of these changes occurred because the uses for the DSM changed. However, the greatest changes began with the use of extensive empirical research to guide the creation of the classification system and its continued revisions. In this Discussion, you will explore the development history of the DSM system.
In addition, you will consider the impact the classification system has had on diagnosed populations. To prepare for the Discussion: · Review this week’s Learning Resources. · Consider how the APA developed the classification system of disorders for the DSM . · From a historical perspective, consider whether the diagnosis of mental health disorders has led to better outcomes or marginalization of diagnosed populations. By Day 3 Post a response to the following prompts: Provide a brief summary of the process of development of the DSM system of diagnosis. Share something that surprised you about the development of the DSM-5. Describe one example of how the classification system of disorders in the DSM-5 has marginalized or pathologized diagnosed populations historically or currently.
Be sure to support your postings and responses with specific references to the Learning Resources.
Paper For Above instruction
The development of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) has been a complex and evolving process that reflects both advances in psychiatric research and shifts in societal attitudes towards mental health. The first edition of the DSM, published by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) in 1952, was heavily influenced by the psychoanalytic theories predominant at the time and aimed to create a standardized classification system to facilitate diagnosis and research (American Psychiatric Association [APA], 2013). Early editions of the DSM relied on descriptive criteria for mental disorders, primarily based on clinical observation and expert consensus. As psychological research progressed, particularly with the rise of empirical and data-driven approaches, subsequent editions incorporated more robust classifications and operationalized criteria.
A pivotal moment in the development of the DSM was the publication of DSM-III in 1980, which markedly shifted the manual towards a more scientific and standardized approach, emphasizing reliability and objectivity through explicit inclusion and exclusion criteria (Spiegel, 2004). This edition addressed previous criticisms of subjectivity and diagnostic inconsistency. Later editions, including DSM-IV and DSM-5, continued to refine diagnostic categories, integrating findings from diverse fields such as neuroscience, genetics, and cross-cultural research. Notably, DSM-5, published in 2013, introduced significant changes: consolidating some disorders, eliminating others, and increasing the emphasis on dimensional and cultural considerations (American Psychiatric Association [APA], 2013).
What surprised me most about DSM-5’s development was the extent of debate and controversy surrounding certain diagnoses, including the removal of the bereavement exclusion in Major Depressive Disorder and the reclassification of disorders such as Asperger’s Syndrome as Autism Spectrum Disorder (APA, 2013). These changes illustrate the ongoing struggle to balance scientific evidence, clinical utility, and cultural sensitivity. One aspect of concern is how the diagnostic system may marginalize or pathologize populations. For example, the DSM-5’s classification of behaviors associated with normal developmental processes—such as grief or cultural expressions—has sometimes led to the medicalization of culturally normative behaviors, thereby pathologizing specific populations (Walden University, 2019).
A historical example of marginalization can be seen in the diagnosis of homosexuality. Until 1973, homosexuality was classified as a mental disorder in the DSM-II, reflecting societal biases rather than clinical evidence. This classification contributed to the stigmatization and marginalization of LGBTQ+ individuals and hindered their social and legal rights (Toscano & Maynard, 2014). The removal of homosexuality as a disorder marked progress towards greater acknowledgment of the diversity of human sexual orientation but remains a cautionary example of how diagnostic labels can reflect societal prejudices rather than scientific realities.
Furthermore, contemporary concerns highlight racial and cultural biases embedded in diagnostic practices. Disparities in diagnosis among racial and ethnic minorities suggest that cultural misunderstandings and biases influence diagnosis, often leading to overdiagnosis of certain conditions like schizophrenia among Black populations while underdiagnosing mood disorders (Hargett, 2020). This illustrates the ongoing challenge of ensuring that diagnostic systems do not reinforce social inequalities or contribute to the marginalization of vulnerable populations.
In conclusion, the development of the DSM reflects decades of evolving scientific understanding and societal values. While these revisions aim to improve diagnostic accuracy and cultural sensitivity, they also reveal the potential to marginalize certain populations inadvertently. Recognizing and addressing these biases remain essential to ethically advancing psychiatric classification systems, ensuring they serve to diagnose rather than marginalize and stigmatize.
References
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
Hargett, B. (2020). Disparities in diagnoses: Considering racial and ethnic youth groups. North Carolina Medical Journal, 81(2). https://doi.org/10.18043/ncm.81.2.126
Spiegel, A. (2004). The dictionary of disorder: How one man revolutionized psychiatry. The New Yorker. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2004/09/20/the-dictionary-of-disorder
Toscano, M. E., & Maynard, E. (2014). Understanding the link: “Homosexuality,” gender identity, and the DSM. Journal of LGBT Issues in Counseling, 8(3), 248–263. https://doi.org/10.1080/.2014.897296
Walden University. (2019). Social misuse of diagnosis: Pathologizing marginalized populations [Video]. Minneapolis, MN.
Aftab, A. (2019). Social misuse of disorder designation, part 1: Conceptual defenses. Psychiatric Times. Retrieved from https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/
American Psychiatric Association. (n.d.). DSM history. Retrieved December 10, 2019, from https://www.psychiatry.org/psychiatrists/practice/dsm/about-the-dsm