Ty 's Reviews > Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders DSM-IV-TR

Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders DSM-IV-TR by American Psychiatric Associ...
Rate this book
Clear rating

's review
Apr 30, 2008

did not like it
bookshelves: politics-education, sexuality
Recommended for: intellectual masochists in need of a serious headache

The last section at the end of so many dis/orders that stipulates that if your "oddity" prevents you from being functional in all portions of your life you have a dis/order does not account for the problem potentially being with society's bigotry instead of you. I'm not saying it's always the case but sometimes it is and the DSM does not leave room for that.
All the examples are from white culture, the only stats it cares about are from the US or other white dominated countries. I'm an atheist so it works out to my benefit but there is something wrong wrong with a book where spirituality is not taken into account if it is a facet in your life.

So many problems with it. Too many to list here, that's for sure.

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders DSM-IV-TR.
Sign In »

Comments (showing 1-2 of 2) (2 new)

dateDown arrow    newest »

Danica The book is not to be read by itself. A good clinician will evaluate culture, in fact culture is becoming more and more an important issues. The reason that it cares about is the US is because it is published by the AMERICAN Psychiatry Association. It is not meant to classify every person. Unfortunately of course not everyone who uses this is a good clinician. But there are books to supplement the missing culture aspect of the DSM. I think they are adding more culture in DSM 5.

message 2: by Ty (new) - rated it 1 star

Ty  The trouble is not all members of the APA are from the US and/or practice there. Point and case, Dr. Zucker who is not only a member of the APA but heads a subcommittee reviewing a few diagnoses for DSM V (the same one he headed for DSM IV and DSM IV R). But my point stands, it's not just white people who live in North America or indeed, whose clinicians use the DSM. The S in DSM stands for statistical and yet the stats it used to write it were racially skewed and the stats it's used to collect similarly narrowed.
I wasn't reviewing psychiatric practice, but a book as a stand alone object; the same way that I review all other books. Why should I diminish or censor the short comings I found in the book on the account that other books touch on those aspects?

This was not a review about DSM V, it's a review about DSM IV R. I am involved with some the discussions for DSM V. There are some very important changes happening though I've not heard or seen nearly enough around the "race"/ethnocultural/spirituality piece.

back to top