Psychiatry's assumptions challenged in the UK

It is worth mentioning that earlier this month, the British Psychological Society made news by stating that an entirely different understanding of mental health issues, separate from the nosology of psychiatry, is going to be necessary given the understandings being arrived at through psychological research.

This was in response to the highly criticized release of the American Psychiatric Association's new diagnostic manual, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Fifth Edition (DSM 5).  Many psychiatrists themselves — some of them involved in the development of the previous manual — do not like many of the new changes.

The medical model of addressing mental health issues cannot stand on its own.  While medications may be useful, and even necessary, in helping some people, the assumption that medications or medical interventions are the answer to solving people's complex personal or social issues falls short of the current understandings of mental health and wellness.

Medications may be part of the answer, but most often are not the answer.

In fact, overwhelmingly, it is the experience of most psychologists that medications form a bridge to changing the life circumstances, but only some of the time, when nothing else has worked (developing insight, challenging problematic thoughts, developing new routines, altering relationship rules and boundaries, diet, identifying and modifying toxic habits, exercise, increased social contact, meditation, yoga, changing social networks, facing fears, etc. are just some examples of things to try before medication).  Once the circumstances are changed, in many cases, life improves and the medications are no longer needed. A taper of the medication is recommended at that point.

So why are we assuming that "mental health" requires a medical diagnosis?  Shouldn't we be assuming that "mental health" requires a complex psychosocial explanation instead, and then identify any collateral biomedical issues to address as part of the problem, rather than assuming the biomedical issues are the problem?

Food for thought. Happy weekend.