A link on paraphilia and the DSM V

[leora]

There has been some reporting on this issue, and the reporting I've seen completely fails to raise the points in siderea's post to the extent that it gives a completely different view of what the proposed changes are. As I have mentioned what I had read to at least one person and I've seen some people talking about the proposed change, I'd like to suggest

Comments

[dancingyel]

I have mixed feelings about this proposed change. On the one hand, it's a step in the right direction -- making a distinction between a paraphilia and a disorder is a valuable one, for many reasons. However, if you read the paper and presentation this post is based on, you'll see that using their "definition by exclusion" version of defining paraphilia, a huge amount of things would be considered paraphilias, and, thus, potentially a basis for a disorder. The DSM by definition is normative, but this is a bit beyond the usual. The thing that really bugs me, too, is that in a time when the field is pushing for more empirically-based treatments and diagnoses, this whole thing appears to be very random and anecdotal.

Sorry, minor rant. :)