Constructing normality: a discourse analysis of the DSM-IV.

Area of Science:

• Psychiatry
• Sociology
• Linguistics

Background:

• The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) is a widely used classification system for mental disorders.
• Its definition of mental disorder has significant implications for understanding and diagnosing psychological conditions.
• Previous analyses have focused on diagnostic criteria, but less on the underlying theoretical assumptions and discourse.

Purpose of the Study:

• To critically analyze the definition of mental disorder within the DSM-IV (1994).
• To examine the theoretical assumptions underpinning the DSM-IV's classification of mental disorders.
• To explore how the DSM-IV's criteria for normality influence the perception of mental health and illness.

Main Methods:

• Critical discourse analysis of the DSM-IV (1994).
• Systematic and repeated readings of the text to identify linguistic patterns and underlying assumptions.
• Examination of how language in the DSM-IV constructs notions of normality and abnormality.

Main Results:

• The DSM-IV's definition of mental disorder as an individual pattern excludes crucial social and cultural contexts.
• The definition implies faulty individual functioning, neglecting the role of discourse in shaping subjectivity.
• Assumptions about normality in the DSM-IV are linked to productivity, unity, moderation, and rationality.

Conclusions:

• The DSM-IV's individualistic approach to mental disorder pathologizes experiences that may be responses to life events.
• Challenging the DSM-IV's definition is essential for a more holistic understanding of mental health.
• The study highlights the need to consider social and discursive factors in mental disorder classification.