I am so happy I don’t have to worry about the new diagnostic coding.
It appears from the author’s comments in the essay below, that psychology and psychiatry diagnostic codes have been expanded to excess in what is called the ICD 10, the latest catalog of diagnoses in medical practice, essential to medical records keeping and billing.
I can’t say that this changes augurs a decline in the quality of psychiatric care, but it will increase the range of the nonsense aspects–particularly the expansion of categories and the weird attempt to make post traumatic stress disorder a stand alone.
I also consider this business in the context of the American Psychiatric Associations most recent adventure into nosology (diagnostic labeling) in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual 5th Edition (DSM V), which came out with some changes that were probably an improvement, but were criticized by advocacy groups, in some areas.
Many people, including my favorite psychiatrist, Paul McHugh, think the DSM system is antithetical to good medical/psychiatric practice, but McHugh goes further and says that many very influential psychiatric “theories” and therapies were non scientific in McHugh’s opinion. McHugh deplores the Procrustean diagnostic approach that grew out of Freudian theories that he considers bunkum.
I discussed McHugh’s ideas here.
There is a tendency to pigeon-hole people, influenced by the pills that can be used. The game appears to also be oriented to using axis one diagnostics, which get better reimbursements.
Here’s is an archive of postings on psych, since junky psychology and psychiatry ideas are unavoidable.
Personality disorders are axis 2 and characterized as developmental, and are behavioral maladaptions discussed in the essay by Ms. Tyler :
Here is the essay.