Regular marked price: $31.95Discount Price: $23.82
Cost Savings: $8.13 (25%)Price fluctuation possible.
How soon does it ship: Normal ship time within one day
Shipping? Absolutely FREE if you qualify for Super Saver Shipping.
Type of bind: Hardcover
Dewey Decimal Number: 616.89
EAN num: 9780195313048
ISBN number: 0195313046
Label: Oxford University Press, USA
Manufacturer: Oxford University Press, USA
Quantity: 1
Page Count: 312
Printing Date: June 18, 2007
Publishing house: Oxford University Press, USA
Sale Popularity Level: 51476
Studio: Oxford University Press, USA
Other books you might be interested in perusing:
Editor's Notes and Comments:
Product Description:
Depression has become the single most commonly treated mental disorder, amid claims that one out of ten Americans suffer from this disorder every year and 25% succumb at some point in their lives. Warnings that depressive disorder is a leading cause of worldwide disability have been accompanied by a massive upsurge in the consumption of antidepressant medication, widespread screening for depression in clinics and schools, and a push to diagnose depression early, on the basis of just a few symptoms, in order to prevent more severe conditions from developing.
In The Loss of Sadness, Allan V. Horwitz and Jerome C. Wakefield argue that, while depressive disorder certainly exists and can be a devastating condition warranting medical attention, the apparent epidemic in fact reflects the way the psychiatric profession has understood and reclassified normal human sadness as largely an abnormal experience. With the 1980 publication of the landmark third edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-III), mental health professionals began diagnosing depression based on symptoms--such as depressed mood, loss of appetite, and fatigue--that lasted for at least two weeks. This system is fundamentally flawed, the authors maintain, because it fails to take into account the context in which the symptoms occur. They stress the importance of distinguishing between abnormal reactions due to internal dysfunction and normal sadness brought on by external circumstances. Under the current DSM classification system, however, this distinction is impossible to make, so the expected emotional distress caused by upsetting events-for example, the loss of a job or the end of a relationship- could lead to a mistaken diagnosis of depressive disorder. Indeed, it is this very mistake that lies at the root of the presumed epidemic of major depression in our midst.
In telling the story behind this phenomenon, the authors draw on the 2,500-year history of writing about depression, including studies in both the medical and social sciences, to demonstrate why the DSM's diagnosis is so flawed. They also explore why it has achieved almost unshakable currency despite its limitations. Framed within an evolutionary account of human health and disease, The Loss of Sadness presents a fascinating dissection of depression as both a normal and disordered human emotion and a sweeping critique of current psychiatric diagnostic practices. The result is a potent challenge to the diagnostic revolution that began almost thirty years ago in psychiatry and a provocative analysis of one of the most significant mental health issues today.
User popularity level:
Rated by buyers -
The authors of this book are primarily speaking to other professionals in the field of psychotherapy, but their argument is presented in an easily accessible, non-jargon manner. Their concern is for the inadequacy of the criteria for diagnosis of people as suffering from depression. They make their argument in the kind of plodding way (review of the literature, beginning with the ancients) familiar to anyone who has been through academia. They consider various qualifying concerns, counterarguments, and so forth. They are reasonably thorough and never commit the literary equivalent of raising their voices. They are, in short, moderate though concerned in their expression.
I hope they are heard, not the least because the DSM IV is in preparation. The DSM (Diagnostic & Statistical Manual) is the de facto Bible of those psychologists and other therapists in the field of mental health, and the authors of the book here under discusion are rightly concerned that the inadequate criteria for defining clinical depression will be adopted wholesale and across the board, in the new version.
With all that said, what I find most striking about this book is its absolute commitment to preserving something that ought not to be accepted: the notion that emotional suffering equates to illness. You don't have to accept the entire postmodern schtick to realize that Foucault is onto something when he points out the historical relativeness of punishment...and like it or not, being labeled with a major mental disorder, is a form of punishment. (If you doubt this, then please read more widely--Elyn Saks's book, The Center Cannot Hold, is a good, contemporary place to start.) The authors want to uphold the disease model and the profession that depends on it. They do a good job of trying to correct one of its more glaring absurdities--absurdities that are, ironically and terribly, paid for by the "patients" who result from the desire to "treat" human suffering as a disease. What they cannot admit is the implicit indictment of the very profession to which they are committed.
Rated by buyers 
-
I have read from many scientific journals that incidence of depression has increased 5-10 times during the past 100 years. This cannot be true, because a catastrophe is waiting us in less than 50 years - or is it present already? We have two alternatives: either there are many dangerous trends in the western societies or something has changed in explanations of misfortunes and life's problems. Plainly speaking, we are in the middle of ever increasing medicalization. Normal problems of life are now included in diagnostic classifications.
Loss of Sadness makes this all very clear. It is one of the best books I have read lately. The arguments for the main thesis are persuasive: Normal sorrows sufferings and pains of life must not be called depression.
Rated by buyers 
-
Any psychoanalyst worth-his-salt
will tell you there IS a difference between normal sadness and Depression.
Rated by buyers -
To say I enjoyed this book might be a stretch. There were parts that were laborious because it was like reading a very long journal article on the topic. My effort to get through the book were paid off by how I conceptualize two things - the role of context in classification and the art of criticism without destructive criticism. I will detail both below.
Context: The authors make it clear from the beginning that depression is inappropriately diagnosed these days. Typical behavioral responses to sadness are probably misconstrued as depression. I found that part of the thesis quite compelling. Even more compelling was the fact that the evidence seems to favor their perspective. The point is driven home by anecdotes, data, and theory. I liked the combination because it kept the reader (me) thinking throughout the book.
Criticism: Where I think the authors deserve the most praise is for their delicate and precise criticism of the DSM. They do a remarkable job of detailing the merits of clinical diagnosis while also describing the warts. Unlike most DSM critics who want to throw all classification out, they recognize the importance of mental illness types. I was reminded of Paul Meehl's critique of the antinosological critics (in "Why I don't attend case conferences") while reading this book. These authors did not fall into Meehl's trap. Instead, they offered both sides of the situation and made it clear that their omission of context did nothing to denigrate the DSM specifically. Perhaps they were cautious of the criteria and the application of DSM diagnostic criteria without considering the context and history of the patient.
If you find either point worth reading then buy this book. I plan to make all my graduate students read parts of this book for both points above.
Rated by buyers -
Americans collectively made enormous sacrifices and suffered enormous losses in the effort to emerge as victors in World War II. Perhaps we should have had an official year or more of public mourning to grieve publicly the various losses we collectively suffered as a result of WWII. Unfortunately, we had no such period of public mourning of our losses.
Now, in the half century or so since the end of WWII, American society has apparently turned sick, as vast numbers of Americans have come to consider ordinary experiences of sadness as medical problems that need to be medicated. Evidently, there is a vast conspiracy afoot in American society to pathologize and medicate ordinary sadness. This apparent conspiracy has been advanced enormously by the decontextualized symptoms of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) listed in the DSM-III (1980) and the DSM-IV-TR (2000), the diagnostic manuals published by the American Psychiatric Association.
Allan V. Horwitz and Jerome C. Wakefield present an excellent critique of the decontextualized criteria for MDD set forth in DSM-III and DSM-IV-TR.
But will their critique lead to any significant reforms in the DSM-V (due out in 2011) or in the field of psychiatry or in our collective social attitudes about experiences of sadness? For experiences of sadness in mourning, for example, to lead to healthy mourning and healing, the mourning persons evidently need to have a properly supportive environment, which means that we collectively need to learn how to play a proper supportive role for people around us who are mourning.
It is hard in our contemporary American culture to argue in favor of suffering sadness when one could take a pill instead and make it go away. But I would raise the following questions: Does the experience of suffering sadness serve a healthy psychological purpose? Is the psyche structured in such a way that suffering experiences of sadness serves a healthy and constructive role for further positive psychological development? Erich Neumann's _The Origins and History of Consciousness_ (original German 1949; English translation 1954) suggests that the psyche is indeed structured in such a way that requires suffering -- and presumably also sadness -- in the service of psychological growth.
Conversely, when we take a medication to make ordinary sadness go away, are we perhaps postponing our reckoning with experiences of sadness until a later time when such experiences may catch up with us?
When we consider stories from ancient cultures, we notice that heroes undergo tests and ordeals that are accompanied by suffering. When we consider the Homeric epic the _Odyssey_, for example, we notice that Odysseus cries rather often, and he is not crying tears of joy, but tears of sorrow and sadness. Ancient stories of heroes prompt the following observations: No suffering, no ordeal. No suffering, no test. No suffering, no growth?
Perhaps we Americans need to reexamine the roles of suffering and sadness as possibly healthy and enhancing experiences. Horwitz and Wakefield have provided us with an excellent discusion of sadness with which to begin such a reexamination.
--Thomas J. Farrell, author of Walter Ong's Contributions to Cultural Studies: The Phenomenology of the Word and I-Thou Communication (Media Ecology)
Find other books like this one:
