This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (1) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Burstow, B. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

A Critique of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and the DSM

Department of Adult Education and Counselling Psychology at Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto

Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is one of the few DSM categories that was created and became widely accepted as a result of people other than psychiatrists wanting it. Even progressive practitioners tend to assume that it is essentially well constructed and benign. This article shows otherwise. The article fundamentally problematizes PTSD. It demonstrates that the category PTSD is confused, reductionist, contradictory, and arbitrary and that it pathologizes purposeful and valuable coping strategies commonly used by people who are traumatized. It demonstrates, in addition, that the category does not even serve the purpose for which progressive therapists have engaged with the diagnosis and that it cannot simply be "corrected."

Key Words: trauma • DSM • antipsychiatry • feminist

Journal of Humanistic Psychology, Vol. 45, No. 4, 429-445 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/0022167805280265


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				K. Dillenburger, M. Fargas, and R. Akhonzada Psychological Impact of Long-Term Political Violence: An Exploration of Community Service Users Traumatology, June 1, 2007; 13(2): 15 - 25. [Abstract] [PDF]