In Response to "Psychiatric Diagnosis as Reified Measurement": An Invited Comment on Mirowsky and Ross (1989)

Abstract

The Mirowsky-Ross article Psychiatric Diagnosis as Reified Measurement is most remarkable for its derisive attitude toward clinical psychiatrists and their fellow travelers among the ranks of workers, psychologists, nurses, and even sociologists. The emotional thrust of this article seems to be that psychiatrists have foisted the of on unwitting co-workers, patients, and the nosologic field, constructing mythical entities for the social construction of the need for mental health services. Thus the language of categories is the language of the psychiatric guild. Unfortunately, the hortatory message of the article promulgates its own guild polemic. We are hard pressed to discern where the authors stand on the existence of these mythical Are they suggesting that mental illnesses and the need for treatment are themselves myths or mere constructions? If this was not intended, it should be made absolutely clear: there truly are mentally ill people with tormented families who do not give a hoot about measurement but who care a great deal that we are slowly, too slowly, finding effective somatic and psychological treatments for these entities. The simple assertion of a model of the causes and nature of psychiatric illness, as presented by the authors, is a nonscientific position. Their wish to ignore the contributions of biology to current psychiatric classifications calls into question their appreciation of the relevant data. Biologic treatments for provisional diagnostic categories have, in