Talk:American Psychiatric Association

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

DSM-IV-TR Permissions Controversy[edit]

[This discussion might be interesting to anybody interested in,or knowledgable about, DSM-IV-TR:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#DSM-IV-TR_Copyright_question --82.195.137.125 19:14, 20 December 2005 (UTC)]

Expanded[edit]

I've expanded this article and removed the stub marker. EverSince 22:32, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:DSM-IV.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:DSM-IV.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:53, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:DSM-IV.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:DSM-IV.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:37, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Racism and support to eugenics[edit]

Decades ago, American Psychiatric Association gave full support to eugenics and racism.Eugenics sterilization had full support of this association, for many decades.The article article has nothing, about these supports.Agre22 (talk) 18:07, 21 May 2009 (UTC)agre22

Then add it yourself, don't expect other people to do it for you. 69.138.243.26 (talk) 00:38, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, I was blocked many times doing thing such as your sugestion. In this site: [Kr] you can read at the end:

"A psychiatrist named Foster Kennedy gave an address to the American Psychiatric Association’s annual meeting in 1941. In it, he strongly advocated not only for the forcible sterilization of the mentally retarded, but for killing them, especially if they fell below a certain functional level. Because he assumed that such individuals were in constant suffering and would be better off dead, he referred to this killing as euthanasia or mercy killing. His address was published in the Journal of the American Psychiatric Association in July of 1942. In the same issue an opposing viewpoint by another psychiatrist, Leo Kanner, was also published, along with an editorial. While Kanner had no objection to sterilization, he did object to euthanasia. He also questioned the validity of assuming that people of low IQ would necessarily beget children who were also mentally deficient, but did not spend any time exploring the ramifications that would ensue for his philosophy if this were indeed the case. He believed that sterilization should be reserved only for those who could not perform useful work. He feared that stopping more functional people of low intelligence from reproducing might lead to a labor shortage in unskilled occupations which would adversely affect the functioning of society. Of note is the fact that by July of 1942, psychiatrists were already aware of what was going on in Germany. Kanner noted, “If [journalist and historian] William Shirer’s report is true – and there are reasons to believe that it is true – in Nazi Germany the Gestapo is now systematically bumping off the mentally deficient people of the Reich…”"Agre22 (talk) 19:08, 31 January 2010 (UTC)agre22

Possible new section[edit]

This line was removed from the disambuation page for Young Turks, as there is no mention of this here, the target article. Perhaps with some research this could be added to the article:

ref is broken, but im leaving it here to help with research.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 01:17, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

I think Young Turks was used as a metaphor in that context. I don't think those psychiatrists called themselves that, or that they were a unitary/organized group, but I could be mistaken. There are some chapters in this book you may want to read. It doesn't say anything about Young Turks though. Tijfo098 (talk) 02:49, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Drug company ties[edit]

Nobody in their right mind would reject that some, if not most, researchers in psychiatry take grants from drug companies, (and some even fail to declare a conflict of interest thereafter), and that US clinicians go to some pimp CMEs, but that section is written like an anti-psychiatry pamphlet, with little logic gluing the sentences together to their inevitable conclusion. Looking at reviews of the main source, they hardly seem to conclude it's an unbiased or reliable source. Seriously, this blog is a more reliable source about such matters than W's book, and while you probably shouldn't cite the blog at all, the papers and mainstream media articles it cites are probably okay. But it's hard to draw conclusions about APA as a whole. Tijfo098 (talk) 02:44, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

P.S.: It looks like Carlat has a book out and an interview in NPR, [1]; perhaps it's time for Daniel Carlat? Tijfo098 (talk) 03:01, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed[edit]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.psych.org/MainMenu/EducationCareerDevelopment/Library/APAHistory.aspx. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 16:32, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

links to psych.org broken[edit]

hej. Those 2 Links to psych.org from the references section that I tried to follow ended up "page not found" (reference 8 and 9). Using the search on psych.org for e.g. "position statements" gave "no result". maybe someone knowing the new structure of psych.org can fix the references' links. thanks Pardon my German (Fiiiisch!) (talk) 17:28, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on American Psychiatric Association. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

YesY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:47, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:American Psychiatric Association/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

I would up the rating on this article to start or good. It seems fairly reasonable to me, certainly more than a stub--Expo512 (talk) 06:33, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 06:33, 30 November 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 07:34, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on American Psychiatric Association. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:55, 3 July 2017 (UTC)