Maudsley Debates: Enabling or Labelling? (King’s College London)
This House believes that psychiatric diagnosis has advanced the care of people with mental health problems.
Wednesday 5th June, 6pm (refreshments served from 5.30pm)
To coincide with the publication of the 5th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), sometimes described as the “Bible” of American psychiatry, the Institute of Psychiatry is hosting a debate on the issue of psychiatric diagnosis. Some argue that a rigorously standardised system of classification of mental disorders forms an essential role in conceptualising a patient’s problem, in predicting what treatments are likely to be effective, and in conducting valid scientific research. Others consider psychiatric diagnoses to be no more than labels, which lack scientific and predictive validity and serve only to stigmatise and objectify those who suffer from mental disorders. These issues will be debated in the 48th Maudsley Debate on Wednesday 5 June at 6pm at the Wolfson Lecture Theatre, Institute of Psychiatry, Denmark Hill. The motion is “This House believes that psychiatric diagnosis has advanced the care of people with mental health problems.”
Speaking for the motion
Prof Norman Sartorius, former president of the World Psychiatric Association
Prof Anthony David, Professor of Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry
Speaking against the motion
Dr Felicity Callard, Senior Lecturer in Social Science for Medical Humanities, Durham University
Dr Pat Bracken, Clinical Director of Mental Health in West Cork and author of “Post- Psychiatry: Mental Health in a Post-Modern World”.
Chair: Sir Simon Wessely, Professor of Psychological Medicine and Vice Dean for Academic Psychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry