Join !prayerwarriors. Our crusade has begun. 
Why We're Turning Psychiatric Labels Into Identities | The New Yorker 
The DSM as we know it appeared in 1980, with the publication of the DSM-III. Whereas the first two editions featured broad classifications and a psychoanalytic perspective, the DSM-III favored more precise diagnostic criteria and a more scientific approach. Proponents hoped that research in genetics and neuroscience would corroborate the DSM's groupings. Almost half a century later, however, the emerging picture is of overlapping conditions, of categories that blur rather than stand apart. No disorder has been tied to a specific gene or set of genes. Nearly all genetic vulnerabilities implicated in mental illness have been associated with many conditions. A review of more than five hundred fMRI studies of people engaged in specific tasks found that, although brain imaging can detect indicators of mental illness, it fails to distinguish between schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, major depression, and other conditions. The DSM's approach to categorization increasingly looks arbitrary and anachronistic.
Pleasantly surprised this view is getting published in lib magazines. 
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Most "mental disorders" are just being like, "Hey you're kind of a shit person you know?" and trying to medicate that. Return to Jesus
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
The problem is in allowing psychologists to exist. Psychiatrists can better regulate themselves. So many people are sick of these diagnoses being handed out like candy and the problem lies in allowing r-slurs to hand them out to other r-slurs. The most annoying thing is that many of these people seeking diagnoses lack the fundamental requirement for them. Your life has to be negatively impacted because of it. This is especially true for something like autism.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
It turns out gatekeeping the headshrinking occupation behind the IQ filter of medical school actually produces better shrinks. Who'da thought.
The incentive to act competently provided by medical malpractice liability probably helps a lot too.
Current hyperfixation:
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
There's a contention to be made that the reason why we haven't done that is because we have flawed ground truth data because there are too many psychiatrists all too willing to hand out diagnosis like candy. When trying to find genetic links to a specific sort of cancer, that's easy, because we know when running data analytics or training ML models that, in fact, individuals labeled has having the cancer do, in fact, have cancer. When trying the same for psychiatric diseases, because so much of it is self-reported, there's a ton of false positives clouding everything.
I read some study where they were able to get an AI to correctly identify between normal and neurodivergent brains in adults when limited to individuals who had been diagnosed with autism before the age of 5. When they tried the same including brain imaging from those who were diagnosed as adults, suddenly the AI couldn't distinguish them. The obvious conclusion should be that there's brains incorrectly classified as neurodivergent, but that's not going to be brought up, because that implies that psychiatrists are incorrectly diagnosing people, predominately mediocre white adult females who want to be unique. No, Stacy, you don't have autism because you occasionally feel awkward in social situations and want an excuse to tell your boss why you should get to WFH full time. I have autism because I made my entire childhood revolve around railroad trestles and spend much of my free time drawing runway diagrams for fictional airports. We are not the same, but a psychiatrist said we are and now your vanity diagnosis is clogging up datasets from now until the end of time.
Ultimately, attempts to gatekeep diagnoses are going to fail, because in the name of patient advocacy, equality, or affirmation or whatever the prevailing trend in psychiatry is to eschew solid science in favor of emotion. Sure is a coincidence that this happens to be the field of medicine that is by far the most foid dominated.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Anti psychiatrists rise up, you have nothing to lose but your hospital band
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Haha, Scientology was right all along! I knew it!
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
He doesn't even bring up how you need to be diagnosed with something to be treated. But if you're diagnosed with something then the doctors can just discard anything you say after that because you're just being crazy. It leads to a situation where as the patient you've got to be trying to game the system to get the right diagnosis that isn't too bad and isn't too easy.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
There it is. Written by a sexy Indian dude.
They have their faults, but Indian dudes won't stand for feelings messing with the science.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Who would've guessed that the anti-medicalist movement in the trans movement would evolve into "you can self-diagnose with whatever you want (other than trans-race/age/ethnicity) and anyone who questions you is Nazi-adjacent."
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Snapshots:
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2024/05/13/why-were-turning-psychiatric-labels-into-identities:
ghostarchive.org
archive.org
archive.ph (click to archive)
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context