Victim of the Scam

Parental Alienation Syndrome Not Included in the Upcoming DSM-V

In Dr. Richard Gardner, DSM-V, Parental Alienation, Parental Alienation Disorder, Parental Alienation Disorders, Parental Alienation Syndrome on February 16, 2010 at 1:16 am

Being seen for what it is, the recently released draft fifth revision of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-V) did not include the so-called Parental Alienation Syndrome.  The “syndrome” has been seen for what it is: a tool in the legal toolbox that abusers use to take custody of children away from their victims.

From the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette:

Mental health professionals getting update on definitions

Monday, February 15, 2010
By Gary Rotstein, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

What type of mental health problem is gambling addiction?

Is binge eating a mental illness?

Should autism be considered one catch-all disorder or fall under different labels indicating its severity?

Those are just some of the questions that scores of mental health professionals wrestled with for nearly a decade, as they conducted their periodic update of the neuroses of an evolving society.

The result of their work was unveiled by the American Psychiatric Association last week, as a draft version of the new “Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.”

Known as the DSM-5, because it represents the fifth edition of this exhaustive bible for psychiatrists, psychologists and others, it attempts to catalog everything from Complex Somatic Symptom Disorder (related to hypochondria) to Temper Dysregulation Disorder with Dysphoria (persistently very ill-behaving children).

The first update since 1994 also includes descriptions of depression, sleep disorders, alcohol abuse and other common maladies, but everything gets a fresh look because of the volume of new research and science affecting how they’re all regarded, said David Kupfer, the University of Pittsburgh psychiatry professor who chaired the DSM-5 task force.

The final product will go into the offices of all sorts of health professionals — from psychiatrists to family practitioners — while also influencing treatment payments by insurance companies, drug development by the pharmaceutical industry and future research by government and academia.

Dr. Kupfer, the longtime head of Pitt’s psychiatry department before stepping down in October, said the manual remains a work in progress, with revisions based on public and professional reaction before final publication in 2013.

“We weren’t out to make major changes, but so much has happened that we needed to address, that some may accuse us of being overambitious,” he said.

The Shadyside resident, 69, has been nationally noted for his work on depression at Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic. He headed a task force of some 160 international researchers and clinicians who worked on DSM-5, with 13 work groups covering various topic areas.

Among the pronouncements in the draft version:

• All forms of autism will fall under a single diagnostic category, called “autism spectrum disorders,” a concept that drew quick criticism from representatives of those with the Asperger’s form of autism, who are often high functioning.

• Gambling, identified as an “impulse control disorder” since 1980, will be moved into a “behavioral addiction” category that reflects its similarities to drug and alcohol addiction. Certain other addictions, such as excessive use of the Internet, were considered for the category but denied placement there because of insufficient research data.

• Binge eating is recognized as a disorder for the first time, similar to anorexia and bulimia.

• Mental retardation is to be relabeled as “intellectual disability.”

At www.dsm5.org, those interested can obtain detailed information about the draft manual recommendations and provide comments.

Dr. Kupfer, who focused on sleep disorders as part of the DSM-4 task force, said there is intense discussion during every update about what problems merit entering the manual for the first time.

There was consideration of hoarding this time as a mental health issue, but it failed to make it into the recommendations for full manual treatment. There are always lobbyists for parental alienation syndrome, but they did not win out this time either.

Some issues are close enough to legitimate recognition that they end up listed in the manual’s appendix, as binge eating was previously, and where Internet addiction is likely headed.

“The door to get in [the manual] is pretty hard,” Dr. Kupfer said. “Once you’re in the club, it’s then hard to get out. All of us are a little tight about admitting people in the club.”

He expects more flexibility for the manual than the past, however, from being able to use the flow of comments over the Internet to alter the recommendations over the next couple of years and even make changes after the 2013 publication.

By example, Dr. Kupfer said, “We would have loved to change ‘mental retardation’ a lot sooner to ‘intellectual disability,’ which is playing catch-up” with terminology already used in that field.

More than 1,000 public comments poured forth in the first 24 hours after the new recommendations came out, he said.

The psychiatrist said the work on the spectrum of mental health issues seeks neither consensus — which he said sinks to the “lowest common denominator” — nor catering to those “who scream the loudest.”

“If you work with clinicians and researchers in psychiatry together and show them data and raise questions and have good sessions,” he suggested, “I think we can pretty much come to reasonable agreement.”

However, it’s not always clear what the agreements lead to.

Pathological gambling, for instance, has been recognized by the American Psychiatric Association as a disorder since its DSM-3 manual came out three decades ago. Yet, most health insurers still decline to cover compulsive gambling treatment in their policies, noted Keith Whyte, executive director of the National Council on Problem Gambling.

There’s no certainty that shifting gambling to a different category in the DSM-5 will mean anything different to insurers, but there is at least more general recognition of compulsive gambling as a psychiatric disorder than in the past, said Nancy Petry, director of the Gambling Treatment Research Center at the University of Connecticut Health Center.

“As there’s been more research, it’s really quite evident it has a high rate of co-morbidity with substance abuse disorders and shares a lot of features with them,” and so will be compared in the manual closely to drug and alcohol addiction, said Dr. Petry, who chaired the DSM-5 subcommittee reviewing gambling.

Advertisements
  1. Can U believe this? – Look at this child abuse by Burrill – we received this horrendous insight into Janelle Burrill and her practice. One of Janelle Burrills recent victim told us about Burrill (reunification specialist in their case) caught abusing a twelve year old boy.

    Burrills so called fraudulent expertise floundered in front of this smart, modest well educated child. Burrill could not control herself when the 12 yr child questioned her expertise in child custody and reunification, she started to verbally & emotionally abuse him. Burrills conduct below shows her true colors – a narcissistic whacko , an incompetent egomaniac. She truly belongs in handcuff’s …

    == Verbatim transcript provided by the victim – Certfied transcript from transcription company, authentic audio recording ==

    Burrill : Well, we all have. Anybody who does this kind of work, yeah, we’ve all had similar cases, sure. Uh-huh. Have you read it?

    Child : Your book?

    Burrill :Uh-huh.

    Child : I have not read your book, but I — when I first read about you, I put your name in Google, and there had been quite a few results about court cases like this.

    Burrill : Right. Well, not a lot. There’s a few. It’s not — it’s not real common for it to get to this level,but yeah. You have to be an expert in child custody and child development in order to –

    Child : If there’s one thing that I don’t believe in, it’s people being experts in child custody. There’s no one who knows me or my brother better than me and my brother. And the whole fact of some people considering themselves to be experts is just not right. You can never be an expert on someone you don’t know until you — and when you say when you first meet them and you say you’re an expert, it’s not, um –

    Burrill : Sort of like you’re not an –

    Child : I think it’s illegitimate.

    Burrill : Are you an expert in chess?

    Child : No. No.

    Burrill : Not yet? Okay. But maybe someday you will be.I bet you will be.

    Child : I don’t know (inaudible.)

    Burrill : Okay. So anyway, it’s truly up to the Court,and — Um — I understand –

    Child : I know you were gonna say something after you said, “Are you an expert in chess?” Were you gonna say something?

    Burrill : No, no. Um, no. Not at all.

    Child : Okay.

    Burrill : There are experts in certain areas that we depend on.But — But I’m not saying that –

    Child : They can be experts in certain areas. I never said no to that. What I mean — is there’s areas where there can’t be experts and so many people who are in the same business that you are, being a Ph.D. and M.D. and an MFT, and I’ve met a lot of them.

    Burrill :I bet you have.

    Child : Can’t name them all. There’s no one like — for example, if you’re an expert in, um, what was it?

    Burrill :Child custody.

    Child : Child custody.

    Burrill : Reunification.

    Child: What is it that made you an expert in child custody?

    Burrill:Um, a lot of study. Four years, a lot of work for the Court, lots of studies, law degree, Ph.D. (inaudible.)

    Child: I don’t think that’s something that can make anybody –

    Burrill:Researched a lot of (inaudible.)

    Child :So looking at previous cases and what happened? Is that what you mean? Because how do you know about what happened in those previous cases — You know — will happen (inaudible)?

    Burrill :That’s a good question.

    Child : And when you do research, and you see what someone — a decision that someone already made — like,you’re looking at how some cases already played out.

    Burrill:Uh-huh.

    Child: You don’t know who the judge was, who the people were, how they acted.

    Burrill: Right.

    Child: What they acted. What they said; who said what. You can never — you don’t know anything about that, so when it comes to research and something like that — it’s not real. It’s not like looking up, um, the periodic table. It’s not that type of research. Because you don’t know who these people were. You don’t know what their ideas were, how they acted, so you get –

    Burrill:Uh-huh.

    Child: It’s — every time something’s new and different, so –

    Burrill: Uh-huh.

    Child: It’s never that anybody can ever become an actual expert at it. And when you say expert in chess,expert’s actually a certain rating level between 2000 and 2200 level.

    Burrill: Uh-huh. Well, you try to get as much down as you can. I’m not saying that I’m an expert, but you try to get as much down as you can.

    Child : I think you said earlier —

    Burrill : Well, I’ve got more expertise than the average person, because I’ve done research.

    Child : But what I said earlier about research was –

    Burrill: You don’t give a crap about it. You don’t think it holds water. A glass of water would fall right out of it.

    Child: That’s not what I mean. I’m saying for specific areas, research is legitimate.

    Burrill :What you’ve done here for the last hour is try to convince me that I am completely wrong, I know nothing, you know it all.

    =================================

    Burrill commited purjury and the evidence is out! – none of her cronies or pimps can suppress it.

    Janelle Burrill is a sick demented fraud. Enjoy your free anti-psychotic drugs Burrill!.

    When asked under oath in court testimony the fraud burrill testified:

    Burrill : No, No, No, No, Noooo!!!
    Burrill : Never
    Burrill : Do you think I talk like that?
    Burrill : I would never say that to a child

    Janelle Burrill is a Pathological liar and she is truly exposed.
    Keep watching the 6pm news

    Fraud Janelle Burrill Sacramento – Your fraud is exposed and in public domain..None of your cronies or pimps can bury real evidence

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: