新歇斯底里症:边缘型人格障碍和认知不公

Natalie Dorfman, Joel Michael Reynolds
{"title":"新歇斯底里症:边缘型人格障碍和认知不公","authors":"Natalie Dorfman, Joel Michael Reynolds","doi":"10.3138/ijfab-2023-0008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The diagnostic category of borderline personality disorder (BPD) has come under increasing criticism in recent years. In this paper, we analyze the role and impact of epistemic injustice, specifically testimonial injustice, in relation to the diagnosis of BPD. We first offer a critical sociological and historical account, detailing and expanding a range of arguments that BPD is problematic nosologically. We then turn to explore the epistemic injustices that can result from a BPD diagnosis, showing how they can lead to experiences of testimonial injustice which impede patient engagement in meaning-making activities, thereby undermining standard therapeutic goals. We conclude by showing how our arguments bolster ongoing efforts to replace the diagnostic category of BPD with alternatives such as complex post-traumatic stress disorder.","PeriodicalId":44698,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Feminist Approaches To Bioethics","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The New Hysteria: Borderline Personality Disorder and Epistemic Injustice\",\"authors\":\"Natalie Dorfman, Joel Michael Reynolds\",\"doi\":\"10.3138/ijfab-2023-0008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The diagnostic category of borderline personality disorder (BPD) has come under increasing criticism in recent years. In this paper, we analyze the role and impact of epistemic injustice, specifically testimonial injustice, in relation to the diagnosis of BPD. We first offer a critical sociological and historical account, detailing and expanding a range of arguments that BPD is problematic nosologically. We then turn to explore the epistemic injustices that can result from a BPD diagnosis, showing how they can lead to experiences of testimonial injustice which impede patient engagement in meaning-making activities, thereby undermining standard therapeutic goals. We conclude by showing how our arguments bolster ongoing efforts to replace the diagnostic category of BPD with alternatives such as complex post-traumatic stress disorder.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44698,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Feminist Approaches To Bioethics\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Feminist Approaches To Bioethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3138/ijfab-2023-0008\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Feminist Approaches To Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3138/ijfab-2023-0008","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

边缘型人格障碍(BPD)的诊断分类近年来受到越来越多的批评。在本文中,我们分析了认知不公正的作用和影响,特别是证言不公正,与BPD的诊断有关。我们首先提供了一个批判性的社会学和历史的解释,详细和扩展了BPD在病理学上有问题的一系列论点。然后,我们转而探讨BPD诊断可能导致的认知不公正,展示它们如何导致证词不公正的经历,从而阻碍患者参与意义创造活动,从而破坏标准的治疗目标。最后,我们展示了我们的论点如何支持正在进行的努力,以替代BPD的诊断类别,如复杂的创伤后应激障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The New Hysteria: Borderline Personality Disorder and Epistemic Injustice
The diagnostic category of borderline personality disorder (BPD) has come under increasing criticism in recent years. In this paper, we analyze the role and impact of epistemic injustice, specifically testimonial injustice, in relation to the diagnosis of BPD. We first offer a critical sociological and historical account, detailing and expanding a range of arguments that BPD is problematic nosologically. We then turn to explore the epistemic injustices that can result from a BPD diagnosis, showing how they can lead to experiences of testimonial injustice which impede patient engagement in meaning-making activities, thereby undermining standard therapeutic goals. We conclude by showing how our arguments bolster ongoing efforts to replace the diagnostic category of BPD with alternatives such as complex post-traumatic stress disorder.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
14.30%
发文量
56
期刊最新文献
Male Fertility-Related mHealth: Does It Create New Vulnerabilities? The Responsibility Objection to Thomson Re-imagined: What If Men Were Held to a Parallel Standard? Autonomy Without Borders? Understanding the Impact of Undocumented Residence Status on Healthcare Relationships in Belgium Abortion to Abolition: Reproductive Health and Justice in Canada by Martha Paynter What Feminist Bioethics Can Bring to Synthetic Biology
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1