DSM5 - Dangers of subjective and ethically flawed DSM5 scales which will increase the diagnosis of childhood disorders -see the real criteria in this chosen exemplar and decide for yourself- 'Oppositional Defiant Disorder' -some information provided courtesy of the apa website - let's get the national institute of clinical excellence (N.I.C.E..) to block the use of this unscientific manual in the U.K. as we are not an insurance healthcare model and we do not need the four digit code to pay for the meds- we need to act now!

DANGER : DSM5 Revision in 2013 is due!- "After changes DSM5 is still very subjective, lacks rigour, face validity and inter-subject/inter-tester reliability." Dave Traxson 2011(Supported by the BPS critique of July 2011 - see post below)

DSM5 therefore is found wanting on all these statistical criteria and it is not needed in same way in U.K. as we are not an insurance model of healthcare - in the U.S. they need the four digit code from DSM5 on the claim form in order to pay for the drugs.

Proposed  Revision for 2013 of Oppositional Defiant Disorder is an example of how dangerous DSM5 could be to young people in the U.K. due to widening the categories and allowing many more children to be medicated with potentially toxic psychotropic drugs .
   
  

DANGER:

Read and do exercise below

to obtain a diagnosis using DSM5

four or more of the list of symptoms below must be present.

THINK OF A TYPICAL ADOLESCENT

DOES IT AFFECT HIM? 

Have a typical YP that you work with or know in your circle of contacts and ask the question would they get a 'false positive' diagnosis' and therefore be diagnosed with O.D.D. whatever that is.

Do they score positive on the next eight subjective criteria? They only need four out of eight to have an O.D.D. label for life!

Only one seems to have relatively rigorous criteria involving a frequency of occurence in a specified time period that is scientific enough.

Why no mention of key behavioural criteria?
   e.g.- Frequency, Intensity, Duration and Occurrence. (FIDO)- basic test design?

Would it be helpful to the young person and their famly and friends to have this diagnostic label at a key transition point in their life?

Would having a mental illness label hung permanently around their neck be helpful to them and society?

THESE ARE THE REAL DSM5 CRITERIA!

A persistent pattern of angry and irritable mood along with defiant and vindictive behavior as evidenced by four (or more) of the following symptoms being displayed with one or more persons other than siblings.

Angry/Irritable Mood

1.   Loses temper

2.   Is touchy or easily annoyed by others.

3.   Is angry and resentful

Defiant/Headstrong Behaviour

4.   Argues with adults

5.   Actively defies or refuses to comply with adults’ request or rules

6.   Deliberately annoys people


HAVE YOU REACHED 4 YET??-MOST HAVE!

7.   Blames others for his or her mistakes or misbehavior

Vindictiveness

8.   Has been spiteful or vindictive at least twice within the past six months

B. (NOTE:  UNDER CONSIDERATION- why? this is the only vaguely scientific bit!!!) The persistence and frequency of these behaviours should be used to distinguish a behavior that is within normal limits from a behavior that is symptomatic to determine if they should be considered a symptom of the disorder. For children under 5 years of age, the behaviour must occur on most days for a period of at least six months unless otherwise noted (see symptom #8). For individuals 5 years or older, the behaviour must occur at least once per week for at least six months, unless otherwise noted (see symptom #8). While these frequency criteria provide a minimal level of frequency to define symptoms, other factors should also be considered such as whether the frequency and intensity of the behaviours are non-normative given the person’s developmental level, gender, and culture.

C. The disturbance in behaviour causes clinically significant impairment in social, educational, or vocational activities.

D. The behaviors may be confined to only one setting or in more severe cases present in multiple settings.

DANGER:

SURELY THESE UNSCIENTIFIC CRITERIA ARE TOO SUBJECTIVE AND VAGUE WHICH WILL LEAD TO A MASSIVE INCREASE IN THE DIAGNOSIS OF FALSE POSITIVES AND THE CONSEQUENT DRUGGING OF TOO MANY CHILDREN. MULTIPLY THIS BY THE PLETHERA OF REVISED CRITERIA FOR OTHER CONDITIONS E.G. 

"SUB-CLINICAL, NORMAL VARIATION "-
ADHD(RESTLESSNESS),
AUTISM(BRASHNESS),
DEPRESSION(SADNESS), 

SOCIAL ANXIETY(SHYNESS)

+TEMPORARY GRIEF CONDITION(SHOCK)

THE CONSEQUENCES WILL BE HUGE FOR OUR SOCIETY.

DANGER:

"Now is the time to challenge this systemic lunacy of negatively labelling hundreds of thousands of young people."


Let's avoid a :

With 'soma'  or 'drug cocktails of psychotropics for many more of our kids and avoid the U.S. business model to social control!