Can someone help me with an explanation of one ethical and one legal responsibility related to the release of the DSM-5 as well as help me explain at least one anticipated change in the DSM-IV-TR? Also, why is the revision of the DSM-IV-TR controversial?
In terms of legal and ethical responsibilities, let me give you a few ideas.
Take a look: http://jaapl.org/content/38/1/11.full
One huge legal issue is how the legal profession will use the new diagnostic criteria. Would it change whether or not a criminal is competent to stand trial?
If Asperger's syndrome is not its own diagnosis (but just a part of autism) will people who are mentally competent to stand trial be rejected (due to their having autism?). The concept is that Asperger patients are highly functioning and responsible. Autistic people are not.
The diagnostic criteria are getting fuzzier and fuzzier.
How about disability claims? Mental illness is a legitimate claim for getting social security disability. If mild depression or anxiety is now considered its own illness, will this make false claims to disability more legal (or at least legally acceptable)? The options here are endless.
Good quote from the above article:
"The second caution is that the presence of a mental disorder does not by itself indicate loss of responsibility. Assigning responsibility for a given behavior can be ...
The ethical and legal responsibilities for the DSM-5.