Taxonomy of Psychopathology
Professor emeritus at Auburn University
Still chewing on that one, jamzo. Just read this:
The rate of speed in which these new classifications were being published did not escape attention. Zimmerman (1988), among others, was quite critical of this rate of change. Researchers needed stability in the definition of categories in order to perform useful studies of psychopathology. Clinicians, likewise, were confused by and had difficulty adjusting to changes in the fundamental terminology that organized the diagnostic process that was so crucial to their clinical work. Additionally, the discoveries and rate of science did not also support the rapid changes.
What popped into my head was “comorbid,” and suspect these rapidly multiplying diagnoses have resulted in too many people given too many labels.
When you come back from your sabbatical, this is a topic worthy of discussion….
An ” evidenced-based mandate for a new standard of care” -
This lament by Dr. Ghaemi is also worth a look.
Who painted this? It’s lovely.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
1 Boring Old Man is © 2004-2005 Mickey.
Coffee Cup design by Zenith, based on Manji2 by Khaled Abou Alfa and Joshua.
You can syndicate both the entries using
RSS and the Comments (RSS)
xhtml 1.0 trans /
Proudly powered by WordPress.