Sarah Gurley-Green, Lisa Cosgrove, Milutin Kostic, Lauren Koa, Susan McPherson
{"title":"悲伤医学化的先天性后果:重新设定研究议程。","authors":"Sarah Gurley-Green, Lisa Cosgrove, Milutin Kostic, Lauren Koa, Susan McPherson","doi":"10.1111/1467-9566.13866","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>When the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) was published in 2013, there was a firestorm of controversy about the elimination of the bereavement exclusion. Proponents of this change and of the proposed \"complicated grief\" designation believed that this change would help clinicians recognise major depression in the context of recent bereavement. Other researchers and clinicians have raised concerns about medicalising grief. In 2022 \"prolonged grief disorder\" (PGD) was officially included in the DSM-5-TR in the trauma- and stressor-related disorders section. Not surprisingly, there has been a push to identify biomarkers and to use neuroimaging to identify the neurobiological basis of PGD. Some researchers have even suggested that PGD is a 'reward circuit disorder' akin to addiction and that naltrexone, an opioid antagonist, may be a promising treatment. The purpose of this paper is to show how medicalising grief reinforces a research agenda dedicated to the search for pharmaceutical and psychological 'magic bullets.' Following George and Whitehouse (2021), we propose that an ecopsychosocial approach-one that incorporates environmental and contextual factors-is needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":21685,"journal":{"name":"Sociology of health & illness","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Iatrogenic Consequences of Medicalising Grief: Resetting the Research Agenda.\",\"authors\":\"Sarah Gurley-Green, Lisa Cosgrove, Milutin Kostic, Lauren Koa, Susan McPherson\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1467-9566.13866\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>When the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) was published in 2013, there was a firestorm of controversy about the elimination of the bereavement exclusion. Proponents of this change and of the proposed \\\"complicated grief\\\" designation believed that this change would help clinicians recognise major depression in the context of recent bereavement. Other researchers and clinicians have raised concerns about medicalising grief. In 2022 \\\"prolonged grief disorder\\\" (PGD) was officially included in the DSM-5-TR in the trauma- and stressor-related disorders section. Not surprisingly, there has been a push to identify biomarkers and to use neuroimaging to identify the neurobiological basis of PGD. Some researchers have even suggested that PGD is a 'reward circuit disorder' akin to addiction and that naltrexone, an opioid antagonist, may be a promising treatment. The purpose of this paper is to show how medicalising grief reinforces a research agenda dedicated to the search for pharmaceutical and psychological 'magic bullets.' Following George and Whitehouse (2021), we propose that an ecopsychosocial approach-one that incorporates environmental and contextual factors-is needed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21685,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sociology of health & illness\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sociology of health & illness\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.13866\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociology of health & illness","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.13866","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Iatrogenic Consequences of Medicalising Grief: Resetting the Research Agenda.
When the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) was published in 2013, there was a firestorm of controversy about the elimination of the bereavement exclusion. Proponents of this change and of the proposed "complicated grief" designation believed that this change would help clinicians recognise major depression in the context of recent bereavement. Other researchers and clinicians have raised concerns about medicalising grief. In 2022 "prolonged grief disorder" (PGD) was officially included in the DSM-5-TR in the trauma- and stressor-related disorders section. Not surprisingly, there has been a push to identify biomarkers and to use neuroimaging to identify the neurobiological basis of PGD. Some researchers have even suggested that PGD is a 'reward circuit disorder' akin to addiction and that naltrexone, an opioid antagonist, may be a promising treatment. The purpose of this paper is to show how medicalising grief reinforces a research agenda dedicated to the search for pharmaceutical and psychological 'magic bullets.' Following George and Whitehouse (2021), we propose that an ecopsychosocial approach-one that incorporates environmental and contextual factors-is needed.
期刊介绍:
Sociology of Health & Illness is an international journal which publishes sociological articles on all aspects of health, illness, medicine and health care. We welcome empirical and theoretical contributions in this field.