This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by McCARTHY, L. P. Articles by GERRING, J. P. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Revising Psychiatry's Charter Document

DSM-IV

University of Maryland Baltimore County

JOAN PAGE GERRING

The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine

A composition researcher and psychiatrist report findings from their 3-year study of the revision of the most important book in the mental health profession: the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-III). This 500-page diagnostic taxonomy defines some 250 mental disorders, and it functions for the field as a charter document, shaping the way mental illness is understood, treated, and studied. The revision project, which culminates in 1994 with the publication of DSM-IV, is a 6-year project involving some 1,000 psychiatrists and other mental health professionals. In this study the authors examine the DSM revision using three methodologies: in Part I they trace the history of the DSM classification system; in Part II they analyze published accounts of the revision by project leaders; and finally, in Part III they observe the revision process as it was actually carried out in one of the 13 work groups. The authors conclude that the revision of DSM functions less to change the text than to achieve certain social and political effects. They find the revision works to further entrench the biomedical model of mental disorder, to maintain the dominance of psychiatry within the mental health field, and to enhance the prestige of psychiatry in relation to other medical specialties.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				E. J. Engstrom and M. M. Weber Making Kraepelin history: a great instauration? History of Psychiatry, September 1, 2007; 18(3): 267 - 273. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. Greene The Kraepelinian dichotomy: the twin pillars crumbling? History of Psychiatry, September 1, 2007; 18(71 Pt 3): 361 - 379. [Abstract] [PDF]

				E. Barton Discourse Methods and Critical Practice in Professional Communication: The Front-Stage and Back-Stage Discourse of Prognosis in Medicine Journal of Business and Technical Communication, January 1, 2004; 18(1): 67 - 111. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. Longo and M. W. Thomas Book Review : Spurious Coin: A History of Science, Management, and Technical Writing Journal of Business Communication, October 1, 2003; 40(4): 303 - 309. [PDF]

				C. G. HERNDL and C. A. NAHRWOLD Research as Social Practice: A Case Study of Research on Technical and Professional Communication Written Communication, April 1, 2000; 17(2): 258 - 296. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. Munger Emergency Medical Technician Run Reports: A Study of Genre, Practice, and Reflection Business Communication Quarterly, January 1, 1999; 62(2): 116 - 120. [PDF]

				P. Smagorinsky The Social Construction of Data: Methodological Problems of Investigating Learning in the Zone of Proximal Development Review of Educational Research, January 1, 1995; 65(3): 191 - 212. [Abstract] [PDF]