The madosphere is still jumping with news and views on the first published draft of the DSM-5, about which I wrote briefly last week. Mental Nurse comment on the implications of new and modified paediatric diagnoses, including the interesting medicalisation of temper tantrums (Temper Dysregulation Disorder with Dysphoria, apparently); Psych Central review the good, bad and ugly of the tome; and Psychiatric Times just bloody hate the thing.
For my part, having read about my particular diagnoses in much more detail now than when I posted last week, I’ve modified my views somewhat. I was relatively favourable towards the proposed revisions then, but I’m not sure if I still agree with that. One change that I do like is the potential that mixed states can be incorporated into bipolar II, rather than just I, but as far as the BPD and PD changes in general go, I’m not sure I still hold to my view that the dimensional scaling therein is a good thing. I like it in theory, I think, but there are some very negative traits being included, and as Lost in Mental Health pointed out to me, there is a potential danger than if you don’t ‘score’ that highly, that you will be disregarded as someone without a serious illness. This is in some ways applicable to the mood disorders too.
I think the problem for me right now is that the PD section in particular is so ludicrously convoluted, that it’s easy to get lost in it. I do ‘get’ what they’re trying to achieve, I think, but that doesn’t keep the whole thing from being a quagmire with many different strands of which a clinican must be perpetually mindful.
Anyway. Up until yesterday I had found the sum total of no articles that I thought were of great interest. But it’s either a famine or a feast; yesterday I was totally inundated with them. I really can’t be arsed to make this a definitive directory of internet psychology, so I’m just going to single out a few links.
Two Australian academics have, however, sought to make their website the definitive directory on the internet of philosophical and psychological articles on consciousness. I haven’t been through many of these papers yet, but this is truly a mind-blowing resource that you should definitely check out if you are interested in this subject and indeed philosophy or psychology in general.
A couple on therapy, of course.
Psych Central ask what you’re meant to do if you run into your therapist in public. This is something about which I have always wondered; a difficult social encounter, to be sure. It is postulated in this article that the therapist will generally take the lead from the client, though the author does state that some shrinks of the analytic persuasions will often feel it better not to acknowledge the client at all. This, to me, seems even weirder than running into each other in the first place.
Regular readers will be aware that last week, I questioned what the very point of psychotherapy was. The author of the perennially interesting Kellevision blog seeks to find the answer – and it is not to make us clients always happy-go-lucky. The author quite rightly acknowledges that real therapy should be hard, hard work.
As ever, please feel free to contact me if you have anything you’d like to see included in AotW.