Nancy Pelosi coins a new term for gun control

[Snatch Napkin]

Oh shit!! Everything they need to commit us is posted throughout this site!!

[Forever_frost]

What is this DSM5 you keep talking about Frost?

It is the diagnostic manual that shrinks use to diagnose patients. It's the reason I dropped my degree in psych and moved to another despite merely having to take the comp. Everything you do, every emotion you can display, is listed as a disorder

[stevo]

-This is sourced from Wiki, but the high-lighted parts are exactly what I am worried about:

British Psychological Society response

The British Psychological Society in the United Kingdom stated in its June 2011 response that it had "more concerns than plaudits".[59] It criticized proposed diagnoses as "clearly based largely on social norms, with 'symptoms' that all rely on subjective judgements... not value-free, but rather reflect[ing] current normative social expectations", noting doubts over the reliability, validity, and value of existing criteria, that personality disorders were not normed on the general population, and that "not otherwise specified" categories covered a "huge" 30% of all personality disorders.

It also expressed a major concern that "clients and the general public are negatively affected by the continued and continuous medicalisation of their natural and normal responses to their experiences... which demand helping responses, but which do not reflect illnesses so much as normal individual variation".

The Society suggested as its primary specific recommendation, a change from using "diagnostic frameworks" to a description based on an individual's specific experienced problems, and that mental disorders are better explored as part of a spectrum shared with normality:

[We recommend] a revision of the way mental distress is thought about, starting with recognition of the overwhelming evidence that it is on a spectrum with 'normal' experience, and that psychosocial factors such as poverty, unemployment and trauma are the most strongly-evidenced causal factors. Rather than applying preordained diagnostic categories to clinical populations, we believe that any classification system should begin from the bottom up – starting with specific experiences, problems or 'symptoms' or 'complaints'...... We would like to see the base unit of measurement as specific problems (e.g. hearing voices, feelings of anxiety etc)? These would be more helpful too in terms of epidemiology.

While some people find a name or a diagnostic label helpful, our contention is that this helpfulness results from a knowledge that their problems are recognised (in both senses of the word) understood, validated, explained (and explicable) and have some relief. Clients often, unfortunately, find that diagnosis offers only a spurious promise of such benefits. Since – for example – two people with a diagnosis of 'schizophrenia' or 'personality disorder' may possess no two symptoms in common, it is difficult to see what communicative benefit is served by using these diagnoses. We believe that a description of a person's real problems would suffice. Moncrieff and others have shown that diagnostic labels are less useful than a description of a person's problems for predicting treatment response, so again diagnoses seem positively unhelpful compared to the alternatives.
—British Psychological Society June 2011 response

If the social norm is to allow an oppressive government to destroy our freedoms and trample our Constitution, they now have all they need to disarm anyone considered out of the norm.

Stevo

[Forever_frost]

Psychology is 100% subjective. I proved to multiple professors I can open the DSM 4 and pick something at random and give them a diagnosis.