The fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) marks the first significant revision of this document since 1994 when the DSM-IV appeared. The changes in the DSM were primarily due to advances in the field of neuroscience, and identified problems related to the criteria that have been in circulation since the release of the DSM-IV. Many decisions were also dictated by the desire to ensure better consistency with the international classification of diseases and its upcoming 11th revision.
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) defines the common language by which clinicians, researchers, and health officials in the United States talk about mental disorders. The latest edition of the DSM, its fifth revision (DSM-5) (1), published in May 2013, is the first major revision of diagnostic criteria and classification since 1994 when the DSM-IV (2) was published (Kobayashi et al., 2019). Historically, the World Health Organization (WHO) has proposed its classification system for mental disorders, which was mainly used for insurance payments and the collection of national and international statistical data.
However, when the international conference on the classification of mental disorders was held in Copenhagen, there was a worldwide awareness that the ICD should offer clearer diagnostic criteria for mental disorders. In order for information on the cultural aspects of mental disorders the DSM-5 research group on gender and cultural issues was instructed to develop recommendations for individual working groups. These recommendations included a discussion of the possible influence of racial, ethnic, and gender factors on diagnostic criteria. New information about gender or cultural differences, such as, for example, the difference in prevalence and psychopathology; description of gaps in the literature indicating the need for field research or analysis of additional literature. In social work, the DSM method makes it possible to identify syndromes – combinations of features selected by all members of the respondent groups; the number and structure of the identified syndromes.
The most well-known and influential set of ethical standards applied in US social work is the Code of Ethics of the National Association of Social Workers (NASW). The Code of Ethics is used in the United States by official bodies that exercise control over the activities of social workers. The National Association of Social Workers, the largest professional community of social workers in the United States, also relies on the Code of Ethics when considering ethical complaints filed by members of the association. She also oversees the implementation of the Code of ethics. Suppose the actions of a social worker contradict the Code of Ethics (Williams et al., 2018). In that case, they may be suspended from certain types of professional activities, such as, for example, counseling supervision, and may also be fined or punished. NASR adopted the new Code of Ethics in 1996. It is valid to this day with minor amendments. The Code consists of four main sections: the first section (preamble) briefly describes the mission of social work and its key values.
For the first time in the history of professional social workers in the United States, the Code of Ethics officially authorizes the mission of social work and its key values. The Code describes the features and unique features of the profession: intercultural sensitivity, the desire to end all forms of discrimination, poverty, oppression, and other forms of social injustice and social inequality. The historical continuity of social work values, which are based on social service to society, is noted. The second section contains an overview of its main functions and a brief guide to solving ethical problems. The last and most extensive section of the Code, “Ethical Standards”, includes 155 ethical standards developed to regulate the behavior of social workers and serve as the basis for making decisions on ethical complaints (Kobayashi et al., 2019). The standards are divided into six sections concerning social workers’ ethical obligations towards clients, colleagues, profession, and society as a whole.
The MSW-10 categories related to sexual development and orientation were recommended for removal from MSW-11. Thus, the MSW-10 explicitly states that sexual orientation in itself cannot be considered a disease. Nevertheless, MSW-10, which groups Psychological and behavioral disorders related to sexual development and orientation, suggests that there are mental disorders related to sexual orientation. (Lüdtke et al., 2018). Given that the manifestation of same-sex orientation continues to be stigmatized in certain parts of the world. Thus, the psychological and behavioral symptoms observed in non-heterosexual people may result from constant hostile social reactions to a greater extent than the manifestation of psychopathology caused by internal processes. This view is supported by reliable empirical evidence obtained in international studies. This, in fact, strongly contradicts the MSW-10 provision that social deviance or an independent conflict that does not entail personality dysfunction cannot be classified as a mental disorder. As a master with a degree in social work, I will consult, as necessary, with ethics committees established based on agencies, conflict resolution bodies, ethics specialists, competent colleagues, supervisors, lawyers.
In conclusion, a social worker should contribute to the general welfare of society. This section includes issues related to the duty of a social worker to prevent and eliminate discrimination. Moreover, the duty is to ensure that all persons especially those in need have freedom of choice and equal opportunities and access to the services they need. A social worker should contribute to political and legislative changes to improve people’s lives.
References
Lüdtke, J., In-Albon, T., Schmeck, K., Plener, P. L., Fegert, J. M., & Schmid, M. (2018). Nonsuicidal self-injury in adolescents placed in youth welfare and juvenile justice group homes: associations with mental disorders and suicidality. Journal of abnormal child psychology, 46(2), 343-354. Web.
Kobayashi, Y., & Kondo, N. (2019). Organizational justice, psychological distress, and stress-related behaviors by occupational class in female Japanese employees. PloS one, 14(4), e0214393. Web.
Williams, M.T., Metzger, I.W., Leins, C., & DeLapp, C. (2018). Assessing Racial Trauma Within a DSM-5 Framework: The UConn Racial/Ethnic Stress and Trauma Survey. American Psychological Association, 3(4), 242-260