Nosologomania: DSM & Karl Jaspers' critique of Kraepelin

Emil Kraepelin's nosology has been reinvented, for better or worse. In the United States, the rise of the neo-Kraepelinian nosology of DSM-III resuscitated Kraepelin's work but also differed from many of his ideas, especially his overtly biological ontology. This neo-Kraepelinian system has led to concerns regarding overdiagnosis of psychiatric syndromes ("nosologomania") and perhaps scientifically ill-founded psychopharmacological treatment for presumed neo-Kraepelinian syndromes. In the early 20th century, Karl Jaspers provided unique insights into Kraepelin's work, and Jaspers even proposed an alternate nosology which, though influenced by Kraepelin, also introduced the concept of ideal types. Jaspers' critique of Kraepelin may help us reformulate our current neo-Kraepelinian nosology for the better.

Neuroimaging in psychiatry: evaluating the ethical consequences for patient care

According to many researchers, it is inevitable and obvious that psychiatric illnesses are biological in nature, and that this is the rationale behind the numerous neuroimaging studies of individuals diagnosed with mental disorders. Scholars looking at the history of psychiatry have pointed out that in the past, the origins and motivations behind the search for biological causes, correlates, and cures for mental disorders are thoroughly social and historically rooted, particularly when the diagnostic category in question is the subject of controversy within psychiatry. This is obscured by neuroimaging studies that drive researchers to proclaim 'revolutions' in psychiatry, namely in the DSM. Providing neuroimaging evidence to support the contention that a condition is 'real' is likely to be extremely influential, as has been extensively discussed in the neuroethics literature. This type of evidence will also reinforce the pre-existing beliefs of those researchers or clinicians who are already expecting a biological description. The uncritical credence given to neuroimaging research is an ethical issue, not in its potential for contributing to misdiagnosis per se but because of the motivations that often drive this research. My claim is that this research should proceed with an awareness of presumptions and motivations underlying the field as a whole, in addition to an explicit focus on the past and potential future consequences of classification and diagnosis on the groups of individuals under study.

Ethical psychiatry in an uncertain world: conversations and parallel truths

Psychiatric practice is often faced with complex situations that seem to pose serious moral dilemmas for practitioners. Methods for solving these dilemmas have included the development of more objective rules to guide the practitioner such as utilitarianism and deontology. A more modern variant on this objective model has been 'Principlism' where 4 mid level rules are used to help solve these complex problems. In opposition to this, there has recently been a focus on more subjective criteria for resolving complex moral dilemmas. In particular, virtue ethics has been posited as a more sensitive method for helping doctors to reason their way through difficult ethical issues. Here the focus is on the character traits of the practitioner. Bloch and Green advocated another way whereby more objective methods such as Principlism and virtue ethics are combined to produce what they considered sound moral reasoning in psychiatrists. This paper points out some difficulties with this approach and instead suggests that a better model of ethical judgment could be developed through the use of narratives or stories. This idea puts equal prima facie value on the patient's and the psychiatrist's version of the dilemma they are faced with. It has the potential to lead to a more genuine empathy and reflective decision-making.

The ethics of psychiatric education

Evidence-based medicine and the professional virtues of integrity, compassion, self-effacement, and self-sacrifice constitute the cornerstones of an ethics of psychiatric education. As informed by the pioneering work of John Gregory, psychiatric educators must promote evidence-based and ethically justified behaviors in learners and practicing physicians through example and by formal teaching. These processes together will enable patients to trust the competence of psychiatrists and that psychiatrists will serve the interests of patients first.

Should or should not forensic psychiatrists think about free will?

The forensic psychiatrist's task is often considered to be tightly connected to the concept of free will. Yet, there is also a lack of clarity about the role of the concept of free will in forensic psychiatry. Recently, Morse has argued that forensic psychiatrists should not mention free will in their reports or testimonies, and, moreover, that they should not even think about free will. Starting from a discussion on Morse's claims, I will develop my own view on how forensic psychiatrists are confronted with the issue of free will and how they should deal with this concept and the confusion surrounding it. I conclude that psychiatrists should at least feel free to think about free will and that the conceptual challenges connected to the issues of free will and accountability could rather encourage than deter forensic psychiatrists to think about them.

Empirical ethics as dialogical practice

In this article, we present a dialogical approach to empirical ethics, based upon hermeneutic ethics and responsive evaluation. Hermeneutic ethics regards experience as the concrete source of moral wisdom. In order to gain a good understanding of moral issues, concrete detailed experiences and perspectives need to be exchanged. Within hermeneutic ethics dialogue is seen as a vehicle for moral learning and developing normative conclusions. Dialogue stands for a specific view on moral epistemology and methodological criteria for moral inquiry. Responsive evaluation involves a structured way of setting up dialogical learning processes, by eliciting stories of participants, exchanging experiences in (homogeneous and heterogeneous) groups and drawing normative conclusions for practice. By combining these traditions we develop both a theoretical and a practical approach to empirical ethics, in which ethical issues are addressed and shaped together with stakeholders in practice. Stakeholders' experiences are not only used as a source for reflection by the ethicist; stakeholders are involved in the process of reflection and analysis, which takes place in a dialogue between participants in practice, facilitated by the ethicist. This dialogical approach to empirical ethics may give rise to questions such as: What contribution does the ethicist make? What role does ethical theory play? What is the relationship between empirical research and ethical theory in the dialogical process? In this article, these questions will be addressed by reflecting upon a project in empirical ethics that was set up in a dialogical way. The aim of this project was to develop and implement normative guidelines with and within practice, in order to improve the practice concerning coercion and compulsion in psychiatry.

Substance use disorder genetic research: investigators and participants grapple with the ethical issues

OBJECTIVE

This qualitative research examined the ethical concerns regarding the psychosocial issues, research design and implementation, and application of psychiatric genetic research on substance use disorders (SUD) from multiple perspectives.

METHODS

A literature review of the bioethics literature related to psychiatric genetics and focus groups explored the ethical implications of SUD genetic research. Twenty-six National Institute on Drug Abuse funded principal investigators in the field of psychiatric genetic research, nine adolescent patients in residential SUD treatment, and 10 relatives of patients participated in focus groups (held separately). The focus groups were recorded, transcribed, and the content was analyzed. The themes that emerged from the literature and the focus group transcripts were organized by using NVIVO7, a software package designed to manage, analyze, and compare narrative data.

RESULTS

Investigators and the literature expressed similar concerns regarding the ethical concerns associated with psychiatric genetic research including violation of privacy, misunderstanding about psychiatric genetics, stigmatization, commercialization, discrimination, eugenics, consequences of research on illegal behavior, unforeseen consequences, altered notion of individual responsibility, and others. Patients and their relatives showed little familiarity with the ethical issues as identified by professionals and little concern regarding most of the potential risks. The exception was apprehension associated with potential criminal justice uses of stored genetic information, in particular enforced therapy and stigmatization, which elicited some concern from all perspectives.

CONCLUSION

The challenge for further research is to identify risks and benefits of SUD research that are germane in a behaviorally disinhibited population and devise effective tools to communicate information to participants through an improved informed consent process.

[Attitudes and behaviors of psychiatry residents and psychiatrists working in training institutes towards the relationship between the pharmaceutical industry and physicians]

OBJECTIVE

To determine the attitudes and behaviors of psychiatrists and psychiatry residents towards pharmaceutical representatives and their promotional activities, and to evaluate the effect of the duration of residency and type of the training institution on these attitudes and behaviors.

METHOD

A validated questionnaire for assessing the attitudes and behaviors of physicians towards the pharmaceutical industry was administered to psychiatrists and psychiatry residents at regional meetings. Of the 1973 participants, 348 responded.

RESULTS

Although there was significant interaction between psychiatrists and pharmaceutical representatives, 50.7% of psychiatrists reported that they thought these interactions had no impact on their prescribing practices. First- and second-year residents agreed more than the other residents and the specialist that pharmaceutical representatives provided accurate information and had no effect on physician prescribing practices. First- and second-years residents agreed less than older residents that pharmaceutical representatives used marketing techniques. The psychiatrists regarded most of the pharmaceutical promotions as appropriate. State hospital staff agreed more than the university hospital staff that the pharmaceutical industry should support educational meetings in their institutions.

CONCLUSION

There was intense interaction (3/4)characterized by undefined boundaries (3/4)between psychiatrists and the pharmaceutical industry. Most physicians were not provided any guidelines concerning their interactions with pharmaceutical representatives and there was general concern about the necessity of restricting these interactions.

Can we justify eliminating coercive measures in psychiatry?

The practice of coercive measures in psychiatry is controversial. Although some have suggested that it may be acceptable if patients are a danger to others or to themselves, others committed themselves to eliminate it. Ethical, legal and clinical considerations become more complex when the mental incapacity is temporary and when the coercive measures serve to restore autonomy. We discuss these issues, addressing the conflict between autonomy and beneficence/non-maleficence, human dignity, the experiences of patients and the effects of coercive measures. We argue that an appeal to respect autonomy and/or human dignity cannot be a sufficient reason to reject coercive measures. All together, these ethical aspects can be used both to support and to reject a non-seclusion approach. The total lack of controlled trials about the beneficial effects of coercive measures in different populations however, argues against the use of coercive measures.

Therapeutic risk management of clinical-legal dilemmas: should it be a core competency?

Therapeutic risk management of clinical-legal dilemmas achieves an optimal alignment between clinical competence and an understanding of legal concerns applicable to psychiatric practice. Understanding how psychiatry and law interact in frequently occurring clinical situations is essential for effective patient care. Successful management of clinical-legal dilemmas also avoids unnecessary, counterproductive defensive practices.

Ethics and evidence in psychiatric practice

Many psychiatrists have endorsed the idea of evidence-based psychiatry, the application of the principles of evidence-based medicine (EBM) to psychiatric practice. Proponents of an evidence-based approach to psychiatry hope that if practice is driven by "hard" scientific data, there will be greater potential to help patients. In other words, advocates of evidence-based psychiatry aim to bolster psychiatry's ethical standing through scientific evidence. Can EBM provide this ethical substantiation to psychiatry? This article provides an overview of some of the main ethical issues within psychiatry and examines three interrelated questions: (1) to which ethical values is EBM committed? (2) which ethical theory is reflected in these values? and (3) can these values and theories resolve existing ethical issues in psychiatry? EBM strives for the "greatest good for the greatest number," where good is defined as improved health. This utilitarian orientation cannot, however, address critical areas of moral importance for psychiatry, such as how its practitioners differentiate normal from abnormal, how they determine which forms of suffering should be alleviated through psychiatric means, and when involuntary intervention is ethically justified. The ethical principles implicit in EBM are too limited to serve as an ethical basis for psychiatry.

Ethical and cultural considerations in delivering psychiatric diagnosis: reconciling the gap using MDD diagnosis delivery in less-acculturated Chinese patients

Talking to patients from diverse cultural backgrounds about their psychiatric disorders requires knowledge of one's own culture, the patients' cultures, and the ways in which they might interact, both in positive and unexpectedly negative ways. In this paper, we discuss the issues raised by discussing psychiatric diagnoses with Chinese-Americans who hold traditional illness beliefs and are not familiar with Western conceptions of psychiatric disorders. We explore how cultural values influence this aspect of medical practice, and suggest practical approaches to communicating the diagnosis of major depressive disorder in a culturally sensitive manner. Our clinical approach is to develop co-constructed illness narratives with patients, and to aid this process by reframing different elements of the clinical process into more culturally resonant forms. The following steps are suggested: 1) elicit patient's illness beliefs; 2) understand and acknowledge multiple explanatory models; 3) contextualize depressive symptoms into patient's physical health and social system; 4) introduce Western psychiatric theories in ways that reflect assumptions shared by Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM); 5) involve patients' families whenever possible; and 6) use terminology that avoids unintended stigma.

The antidepressant debate and the balanced placebo trial design: an ethical analysis

There is ongoing debate about whether randomized, placebo-controlled trials under a double-blind have reliably established the pharmacological efficacy of antidepressants. Numerous meta-analyses of antidepressant efficacy trials, e.g., Kirsch et al. [Kirsch, I., Moore, T. J., Scoboria, A., & Nicholls, S. (2002). The emperor's new drugs: An analysis of antidepressant medication data submitted to the U.S. food and drug administration. Prevention and Treatment, 5, Article 23. (Retrieved July 19, 2007 from http://journals.apa.org/prevention/volume5)], have shown a modest drug-placebo difference but methodological problems with standard trial design preclude a definitive conclusion that this difference results from specific biological effects of antidepressants or the nonspecific factors that have not been adequately excluded. Standard trial design assumes the additivity thesis of pharmacological efficacy, being the assumption that the specific or "true" magnitude of the pharmacological effect is limited to the difference between the drug and placebo responses in a standard trial. If the drug effects are as small as these meta-analyses suggest, then their clinical effectiveness is questionable. If the drug effects are actually larger but masked by placebo effects, then the additivity thesis is not valid and we risk false negative results with standard trial design. Kirsch et al. propose an alternative, four arm balanced placebo trial design (BPTD) that can accurately test the additivity thesis. The BPTD uses antidepressants, active placebos and the intentional deception of research subjects. My focal question is whether the BPTD is ethically defensible. I will explore two objections that can be raised against it: 1) lying to BPTD research subjects violates their autonomy and exploits their illness and 2) the BPTD may not enable us to test the additivity thesis with accuracy, i.e., it may contribute to the masking of drug effects that it aims to avoid. I argue that these objections support the conclusion that the BPTD is ethically indefensible.

"Enhanced" interrogation of detainees: do psychologists and psychiatrists participate?

After revelations of participation by psychiatrists and psychologists in interrogation of prisoners at Guantánamo Bay and Central Intelligence Agency secret detention centers, the American Psychiatric Association and the American Psychological Association adopted Position Statements absolutely prohibiting their members from participating in torture under any and all circumstances, and, to a limited degree, forbidding involvement in interrogations. Some interrogations utilize very aggressive techniques determined to be torture by many nations and organizations throughout the world. This paper explains why psychiatrists and psychologists involved in coercive interrogations violate the Geneva Conventions and the laws of the United States. Whether done with ignorance of professional ethical obligations or not, these psychiatrists and psychologists have crossed an ethical barrier that may best be averted from re-occurring by teaching medical students and residents in all medical specialties about the ethics principles stemming from the 1946-1947 Nuremberg trials and the Geneva Conventions, together with the Ethics Codes of the World Medical Association and the American Medical Association; and, with regard to psychiatric residents and psychological trainees, by the teaching about The Principles of Medical Ethics With Annotations Especially Applicable to Psychiatry and the Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct, respectively. In this way, all physicians and psychologists will clearly understand that they have an absolute moral obligation to "First, do no harm" to the human beings they professionally encounter.