According to their ethical code...which usually becomes part of a state's licensing statutes...the unethics of diagnosing mental disorders by clinical psychologists is a problem.

Clinical psychology has its roots in psychometrics...the scientific measurement of mental functions. The earliest and most commonly known example of this is IQ testing.

For a Ph.D. in clinical psychology...students had to know and use the scientific literature...then to design and carry out publishable scientific research.

If they couldn't...it didn't matter how caring they were in the clinic. They didn't get a Ph.D. because the Code of Ethics For Psychologists -- Standard 2.04 says clearly...

Psychologists' work is based upon established scientific...knowledge of the discipline.

And the 'disorders' in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM)...the diagnostic bible...are not determined by scientific investigation. Scientific knowledge is missing in the diagnostic practice of clinical psychology.

A clinical psychologist diagnoses a 'disorder' by matching symptoms to descriptions in the DSM. Good science requires a standard of what's normal before you can decide what is abnormal. But normal and disordered are never defined to differentiate them. So the extent of any 'disorder' can't be measured.

Despite its requirement to be scientific in its activities...the profession became 'medicalized' and adopted the procedures and the jargon of psychiatry -- which has never claimed to be a scientific discipline. It uses borrowed terms like...mental health...psychotherapy...psychopathology...psychiatric diagnosis. And it often relies on medication to manage symptoms in patients.

Why would psychologists use unethical methods?

Unfortunately the incentives...or pressures...are great for psychologists to use unvalidated diagnoses. Insurance companies...who pay psychologists...and the courts...that use them as expert witnesses...put great emphasis on diagnosis of mental disorder.

How could this affect me?

It wouldn't be such a serious matter...except a diagnosis of psychiatric disorder can have unexpected negative consequences in people's lives. When they don't know who uses diagnostic data or how...people even can lose their liberty based on unvalidated disorders.

If you see a clinical psychologist and you use insurance to pay for psychotherapy...a diagnosis is usually required...and may legally be shared with the insurer's affiliated companies.

This data sharing may have negative results (e.g., denial of employment)...which the therapist may not have explored with you. If not...then your agreement to put diagnostic data on the insurance form was not informed consent.

However, the Code of Ethics For Psychologists requires informed consent to share information (Standard 3.10) by discussing...

1. the involvement of third parties (e.g., an insurance company or credit card company and their affiliates) and limits of confidentiality. (Standard 10.01).

2. by discussing the foreseeable uses of the information generated through their psychological activities. (Standard 4.02)

How do I know psychiatric diagnosis isn't scientific?

With the DSM-III the American Psychiatric Association tried to validate the psychiatric diagnosis of 'disorders'...using scientific methods to answer the question: Would clinicians...independently evaluating the same symptoms...arrive at the same diagnosis?

The results were discouraging. Clinician agreement was very variable. This makes almost all mental health diagnoses arbitrary. But they are put in medical records as facts.

And this arbitrariness infects the next edition of the manual (DSM-V). The physicians candidly assert they may never establish the scientific validity of these 'disorders'...

Limitations in the current diagnostic paradigm...embodied in the current

DSM-IV...suggest that future research efforts...exclusively focused on

refining the DSM-defined syndromes...may never be successful...in

uncovering their underlying [causes].

So, the 'disorders' are...and will remain scientifically unreliable opinion.

You can read about the future DSM-V at the url listed below.

How are psychiatric disorders discovered if they're not scientific?

They aren't discovered...most are created. Committees of physicians (and a few non-physicians) decide...intuitively...what a mental disorder is.

For example...if a child is no good at arithmetic...she may be diagnosed with 315.1 Mathematics Disorder. Difficulty with arithmetic may be due to lack of interest. But that's not a disorder. Or it may be due to neurological problems. Which makes it a genuine medical issue...not an arbitrary psychiatric disorder.

What should I do?

You can remember that psychologists are required to practice from established scientific knowledge. They must have your informed consent to share information...such as a diagnosis. So...lacking those things...you should have concerns in this age of massive government and corporate data bases.

And you should raise any concerns about the unethics of diagnosing mental disorders with your psychologist or other therapist. But first know what their ethical requirements are. The url for psychologists is below. For other professions just type into a search engine "ethics for..." and add the name of the profession.

If you and your clinical psychologist haven't discussed these things...which might make you decide not to use insurance benefits...your relationship may be on vague ethical grounds...which are inadequate to protect you...the consumer...from unwanted consequences.

Can I still see a psychologist if I don't want a psychiatric diagnosis?

Of course. It's very doable. And I'll cover how in another article.

If the truth be known...you don't have an intelligence quotient at all!!

What??

You state "to acquire into Mensa...I had to take an intelligence quotient diagnostic test and mark in the mastermind range" Well there are geniuses and there are geniuses...

Some 'geniuses' mark high on intelligence quotient diagnostic tests and never go forth a genius's legacy. While others...some of whom were learning disabled... contrive the visible light bulb... the burning engine... the telephone... the computer... etc. And some geniuses... like Einstein... have got doubted their ain genius.

There's no such as thing as a 'genius' on an intelligence quotient test. The lone diagnostic test of mastermind is what a individual actually sets out into the world.

Mary Ann Evans...from a deeply spiritual nineteenth century family...stopped formal religion-based schooling at 16 to dwell a free-thinking...morally scandalous...life. But...

As Saint George Eliot...she taught herself ancient and modern languages...among other things...and became a published transcriber of German theological textual matters and one of the top fiction authors in the English language. Her influence shaped other geniuses...like Henry Jesse James and Prince Charles Dickens...who followed her...and it goes on to determine modern literature.

She might not make very well on an intelligence quotient diagnostic diagnostic test because the content of the test would be largely irrelevant to her gifts. And Seth Thomas Thomas Edison would be set into particular erectile dysfunction classes...as learning disabled...or as "addled" brained as he was diagnosed. He only had three calendar months of formal schooling.

Well...where is this leading?

IQ diagnostic tests are widely misunderstood...even by psychologists...which is unforgivable.

Geniuses are original originative minds whose bequest is never obsolete but is ever fresh.

So here is a primer on the misconceptions and nature of the intelligence quotient test.

Misconception 1

You have an IQ. You make not because...

An intelligence quotient is a simple statistic. It have got no psychological significance any more than than saying you have an address. Neither an intelligence quotient mark nor a street computer address is portion of you.

Misconception 2

A high intelligence quotient mark intends you're smart. It doesn't because...

The judgements you do in life...and the action you take on those judgments...tells the human race how smart you are...not some test. Some high intelligence quotient people have got got made judgements and determinations that are truly feeble brained.

Everyone can mention modern times when politicians...most of whom have advanced degrees...did unbelievably stupid things. And others can mention modern times when high intelligence quotient operating surgeons operated on the incorrect patient or removed the incorrect limb. Then there are military leadership who...mistakenly...gave orders to open up fire on their ain men.

In short...a high intelligence quotient mark doesn't coerce you to move intelligently.

So what is an IQ?

IQ stand ups for 'intelligence quotient'...a score. It makes not stand up for intelligence.

A quotient...you remember...is the reply you acquire when you split one figure by another. An intelligence quotient is a number...not a quality of your brain.

When the first intelligence quotient diagnostic diagnostic test was developed by Binet...to rank order students by academic skill...he used a scoring system for his test based on months.

When you got the right reply you got a month's credit. You then added up all of the calendar calendar months to acquire a 'mental age'...and then divided that figure by the months of your chronological age. So if you were 100 calendar calendar calendar calendar months old and you got a diagnostic test mark of 110 months...you split 110 months (your mental age) by 100 months (your existent age) and the quotient = 1.1

To avoid fractions...multiply the quotient by 100. So an intelligence quotient mark of 1.1 goes 110. That agency you are slightly in progress of your chronological age and might be reading-ready before person with a 99 IQ...but without motive it doesn't matter.

Besides motivation...the other ingredient of mastermind is imagination...which is not measured by intelligence quotient tests. Geniuses conceive of what isn't and what most people believe is impossible. The "addled" Seth Thomas Thomas Edison would not have got been able to spell impossible. No problem...it wasn't portion of his vocabulary anyway.

As clip went on...a psychologist named Wechsler abandoned the intelligence quotient computation and devised a widely used...heavily researched...test that states you your percentile rank...and he arbitrarily made a mark of 100 equal to the 50th percentile.

Because the intelligence quotient label was so entrenched in the public vocabulary...he converted percentile ranks to IQs for easiness of communication. But a mark on the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised (WAIS-R) is nil more than your rank among your age peers...on that test.

So a WAIS-R mark of 100 (50th percentile) intends that 50% of your age equals did worse on the diagnostic diagnostic test than you did...and 50% did better. A mark of 85 agency that 16% of your equals did worse than you and 84% did better. A mark of 115 agency that you did better on the diagnostic test than 84% of your equals and 16% outperformed you. Notice that the percents above and below you add up to 100%

So what make you cognize from these scores? Only the information given in the last paragraphs. The diagnostic tests cannot state who will contrive the replacement to the visible light bulb. And modern atom physicists are still trying to work out the nature of substance based on the Grecian observation...made one thousands of old age ago...that everything is made of unseeable atoms in motion.

There...an intelligence quotient mark is nil more than your relative place to your age equals on a peculiar test. That's it.

So if you desire to put claim to genius...forget the intelligence quotient that you don't have got anyway...and dreaming the impossible dream. If you believe a claim to mastermind is out of the inquiry for you because you "have" only an norm IQ...forget about it. You might just do the impossible dreaming a world the manner Seth Thomas Thomas Edison did.