Skip to main content
padlock icon - secure page this page is secure

Free Content Reification of Psychiatric Diagnoses as Defamatory: Implications for Ethical Clinical Practice

Download Article:
(PDF 824.6 kb)
While the mental health professional generally has beneficent motives and an honest belief in the DSM diagnoses assigned to clients, such diagnoses may yet be defamatory when communicated to third parties. Mental health diagnoses invariably lower the individual's reputation in the eyes of the community. At the same time, DSM diagnoses are but one out of a myriad of possible interpretive frameworks. DSM descriptors for the client's distress thus cannot be said to capture the essence of the client's personhood. When a diagnosis is published as if it captured a definitive truth about an individual psychiatric client, it is, in that important regard, inaccurate. That is, such a communication meets the criterion for a reckless disregard for the truth or an honest belief but without reasonable basis insofar as it is considered to be anything more than a working hypothesis. Hence, in certain cases, DSM labeling may constitute defamation.
No References for this article.
No Supplementary Data.
No Article Media
No Metrics

Keywords: DSM diagnostic categories; clinical practice; defamation; ethics; mental disorder

Document Type: Journal Article

Affiliations: Lakehead, University Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada

Publication date: January 1, 2005

More about this publication?
  • Access Key
  • Free content
  • Partial Free content
  • New content
  • Open access content
  • Partial Open access content
  • Subscribed content
  • Partial Subscribed content
  • Free trial content
Cookie Policy
Cookie Policy
Ingenta Connect website makes use of cookies so as to keep track of data that you have filled in. I am Happy with this Find out more