首页> 外文期刊>Philosophy, psychiatry, & psychology: PPP >A Role for Philosophers, Sociologists and BlOETHICISTS IN Revising the DSM A Philosophical Case Conference
【24h】

A Role for Philosophers, Sociologists and BlOETHICISTS IN Revising the DSM A Philosophical Case Conference

机译:哲学家,社会学家和膨化主义者在修改帝斯曼哲学案例会议时的作用

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

The recent publication of the latest edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) was accompanied by heated debate. I argue that part of the reason for these recent controversies is that the process of DSM revision involves making certain value judgments, yet requires a better means for explicitly and expertly addressing these issues. It is important to do so because a) there are certain value-laden questions that science cannot answer but nevertheless need to be addressed in psychiatric classification, and b) the effects of psychiatric classification stretch far and wide. I suggest a means by which the value judgments involved in psychiatric classification can be more systematically and comprehensively examined—by including an independent ethics review panel in the revision process. An ethics review panel could include bioethicists, sociologists, and philosophers of psychiatry who would be in a better position to address these issues.
机译:最近发表最新版本的精神障碍诊断和统计手册(DSM-5)伴随着加热的辩论。 我认为这些最近争议的一部分原因是DSM修订的过程涉及进行某些价值判断,但需要更好地明确和专注地解决这些问题的方法。 这样做是因为a)有一定的价值提出的问题,即科学无法回答,但仍需要在精神病分类中得到解决,B)精神病分类延伸的影响远远宽阔。 我建议可以通过在修订过程中包括独立的伦理审查小组,更系统地和全面地审查所涉及精神科分类的价值判决的手段。 道德审查小组可以包括生物肠道学家,社会学家和精神病学的哲学家,谁将处于更好的地位来解决这些问题。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号