It is an exciting period for clinicians as the revision process of DSM-5 has resulted in open discussions regarding the emerging changes witnessed while diagnosing different patients. There are growing concerns from researchers about the DSM-5 despite it being the most frequent mode used in defining psychological disorders (Wakefield et.al, 2013, p.150). Despite criticism, it has its main advantage as it provides a properly designed standard with comprehensive diagnostic artillery for researchers and clinicians (Schotte C. K et.al, 2006, p.314). However, the DSM-5 main fails are;
…..middle of paper….
Conclusively, the DSM-5 is designed for use across all medical fields, and hopefully it will achieve an even huge consensus without making assumptions on causes of suspected disorders so as to improve the standards of diagnosing behaviors.
McKeever, V. M., & Huff, M. E. (2003). A diathesis-stress model of posttraumatic stress disorder: Ecological, biological, and residual stress pathways. Review of General Psychology, 7(3), 237.