A potential tension in DSM-5: The General Definition of Mental Disorder versus Some Specific Diagnostic Criteria

12Citations
Citations of this article
24Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Your institution provides access to this article.

Abstract

The general concept of mental disorder specified in the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders is definitional in character: a mental disorder might be identified with a harmful dysfunction. The manual also contains the explicit claim that each individual mental disorder should meet the requirements posed by the definition. The aim of this article is two-fold. First, we shall analyze the definition of the superordinate concept of mental disorder to better understand what necessary (and sufficient) criteria actually characterize such a concept. Second, we shall consider the concepts of some individual mental disorders and show that they are in tension with the definition of the superordinate concept, taking pyromania and narcissistic personality disorder as case studies. Our main point is that an unexplained and not-operationalized dysfunction requirement that is included in the general definition, while being systematically violated by the diagnostic criteria of specific mental disorders, is a logical error. Then, either we unpack and operationalize the dysfunction requirement, and include explicit diagnostic criteria that can actually meet it, or we simply drop it.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Cristina Amoretti, M., & Lalumera, E. (2019). A potential tension in DSM-5: The General Definition of Mental Disorder versus Some Specific Diagnostic Criteria. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy (United Kingdom), 44(1), 85–108. https://doi.org/10.1093/jmp/jhy001

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free