Posted by pseudoname on May 16, 2006, at 0:56:30
In reply to Re: new diagnostic manual, posted by Emily Elizabeth on May 15, 2006, at 22:38:23
Hi EE. Always nice to read your take.
I should probably make clear that I'm not reflexively hostile about this topic. (Or at least take care that I'm not.)
Interesting to hear how some clinicians are responding to the PDM. A lot of people are very tired of the DSM. “Atheoretic” is the nicest way of describing it.
I read a couple years ago that psychologists (not this psychodynamic group) were talking about coming out with their own diagnostic book, but I don't think it went anywhere. The feeling was that it could never compete with the DSM. But maybe if the PDM does well, that one and even others might spring up, too. More choice in this area sounds like a good thing to me.
> I would like to add that it is a tool like the DSM and that any tool is only as good as the person using it.
You're right, a good tool can be used badly. But perhaps we disagree on these manuals being good tools at all. Telling someone she has a histrionic personality disorder could be done compassionately and with sensitivity — AND be unhelpful and invalid. If it does not in any significant way channel the treatment, what purpose does such a loaded, stigmatizing differential diagnosis perform, no matter how it is conveyed to the patient?
Or does it help? I guess I haven't seen that spelled out.
EE, would the DSM or the PDM help you as a clinician? Maybe I should try to see the issue from that angle.
–PN
poster:pseudoname
thread:644339
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20060515/msgs/644585.html