<P>Most everyone agrees that having pneumonia or a broken leg is always a bad thing, but not everyone agrees that sadness, grief, anxiety, or even hallucinations are always bad things. This fundamental disjunction in how disease and disorders are valued is the basis for the considerations in <I>Des
Descriptions and Prescriptions: Values, Mental Disorders, and the DSMs
β Scribed by John Z. Sadler
- Publisher
- The Johns Hopkins University Press
- Year
- 2002
- Tongue
- English
- Leaves
- 419
- Edition
- 1
- Category
- Library
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
β¦ Synopsis
Most everyone agrees that having pneumonia or a broken leg is always a bad thing, but not everyone agrees that sadness, grief, anxiety, or even hallucinations are always bad things. This fundamental disjunction in how disease and disorders are valued is the basis for the considerations in Descriptions and Prescriptions.In this book John Z. Sadler, M.D., brings together a distinguished group of contributors to examine how psychiatric diagnostic classifications are influenced by the values held by mental health professionals and the society in which they practice. The aim of the book, according to Sadler, is "to involve psychiatrists, psychologists, philosophers, and scholars in related fields in an intimate exchange about the role of values in shaping past and future classifications of mental disorders." Contributors: George J. Agich, Ph.D., Cleveland Clinic Foundation; Carol Berkenkotter, Ph.D., Michigan Technological University; Lee Anna Clark, Ph.D., University of Iowa; K.W.M. Fulford, D.Phil., F.R.C.Psych., University of Warwick, Coventry; Irving I. Gottesman, Ph.D., University of Virginia; Laura Lee Hall, Ph.D.; Cathy Leaker, Ph.D., Empire State College; Chris Mace, M.D., M.R.C.Psych., University of Warwick, Coventry; Laurie McQueen, M.S.S.W., American Psychiatric Association, Washington, D.C.; Christian Perring, Ph.D., Dowling College; James Phillips, M.D., Yale University School of Medicine; Harold Alan Pincus, M.D., University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine; Jennifer H. Radden, D.Phil., University of Massachusetts; Doris J. Ravotas, M.A., L.L.P., Michigan Technological University; Patricia A. Ross, Ph.D., University of Minnesota; Kenneth F. Schaffner, M.D., Ph.D., George Washington University; Michael Alan Schwartz, M.D., Case Western Reserve University; Daniel W. Shuman, J.D., Southern Methodist University; Allyson Skene, Ph.D., York University; Jerome C. Wakefield, D.S.W., Rutgers University; Thomas A. Widiger, Ph.D., University of Kentucky; Osborne P. Wiggins, Ph.D., University of Louisville.
π SIMILAR VOLUMES
<P>Most everyone agrees that having pneumonia or a broken leg is always a bad thing, but not everyone agrees that sadness, grief, anxiety, or even hallucinations are always bad things. This fundamental disjunction in how disease and disorders are valued is the basis for the considerations in <I>Des
The analysis of decision making under uncertainty has again become a major focus of interest. This volume presents contributions from leading specialists in different fields and provides a summary and synthesis of work in this area. It is based on a conference held at the Harvard Business School. Th
Mixing metaphors in speech, writing, and even gesture, is traditionally viewed as a sign of inconsistency in thought and language. Despite the prominence of mixed metaphors, there have been surprisingly few attempts to comprehensively explain why people mix their metaphors so frequently and in the p
This book represents a bold attempt to address contemporary issues in both metaphor and psychotherapy research. On one hand, metaphor research is increasingly concerned not just with describing metaphors in discourse, but how they could be used more adroitly in purposive βreal worldβ contexts such a
<p><p></p><p>This book examines how 20<sup>th</sup> century theorists have used a discourse of βcrisisβ to frame their conceptualizations of modernity. Through an investigation of four key thinkers (Georg LukΓ‘cs, Hannah Arendt, Reinhart Koselleck and JΓΌrgen Habermas), Gilbert argues that scholars in