Controversy of Dissociative Disorders

Posted: August 28th, 2024

Dissociative Disorders Essay

Controversy of Dissociative Disorders

Dissociative disorders are embroiled in diverse controversies due to the varying opinions of scholars. These controversies often stem from differing interpretations of clinical data and diagnostic criteria. The first controversy is on the effectiveness of the diagnostic criteria of dissociative (Brand et al., 2019). Critics argue that the current criteria may not adequately capture the complexity of these disorders. Studies indicate that DSM-5 on dissociative disorder may increase the risk of overdiagnosis (Sadock et al., 2015). This potential for overdiagnosis raises concerns about the validity of the diagnostic process. Some studies indicate that structured clinical interviews are mandatory (Brand et al., 2019). These interviews can provide a more comprehensive understanding of the patient’s symptoms. The second controversy is on the memory processes of the patients suffering from DID. Memory processes in DID are complex and not fully understood. The controversy is on the overzealous therapists who can induce false memories or repressed memories of sexual abuse (Ganslev et al., 2020). This issue highlights the delicate nature of therapeutic interventions in such cases. The third controversy is the role of iatrogenic influences on the presentation of the disorder (Sadock et al., 2015). Iatrogenic influences refer to symptoms that may be inadvertently caused by the treatment itself. Studies present conflicting views on the influence of iatrogenic influences on the disorder. This debate underscores the need for careful and ethical clinical practice.

My professional beliefs about dissociative disorders is that the conditions exists and affects people’s lives despite the several controversies. These disorders can have profound impacts on individuals’ daily functioning and quality of life. The disorder is more prevalent than people think since it affects approximately 1.5 percent of Americans (Ganslev et al., 2020). This prevalence suggests a significant public health concern. Another belief is that almost 50 percent of Americans experience symptoms of dissociative disorder for a short period in their lives (Sutar & Sahu, 2019). Such transient symptoms may often go unrecognized or untreated. My professional belief is that due to the widespread prevalence of the disorder, the federal and state hospitals in the public and private sector are not doing enough to combat the condition. Increased awareness and resources are needed to address this gap in care. The condition is more prevalent in women than men. This gender disparity may be influenced by various social and biological factors. The best treatment for the condition includes talk therapy, counseling, and medication (Sutar & Sahu, 2019). These treatments aim to address both the psychological and physiological aspects of the disorder. Although no medication specifically treats DID, a practitioner may prescribe antidepressants and anti-anxiety medication to control or manage the healthcare symptoms. These medications can help alleviate some of the distressing symptoms associated with dissociative disorders.

A therapeutic relationship with clients suffering from dissociative disorders is essential in the treatment process. Building trust is a fundamental component of effective therapy. The first step is to make the client feel welcome by ensuring the healthcare environment is friendly with the patients (Sutar & Sahu, 2019). A welcoming environment can help reduce anxiety and promote openness. Practitioners should never judge a patient despite their symptoms. Non-judgmental attitudes foster a safe space for clients to express themselves. Practitioners should avoid recommendations that condemn the healthcare condition of a patient. Instead, they should focus on empowering the patient through supportive interventions. Practitioners should manage emotions to avoid eroding the trust that patients and healthcare workers establish during treatment (Sadock et al., 2015). Emotional regulation by the therapist is crucial in maintaining a stable therapeutic environment. It is vital to take time and build relationships. Patience allows for deeper understanding and connection. Time is vital in allowing the development of trust and disclosure. Trust is the cornerstone of effective therapeutic work. Practitioners should focus on the clients’ needs by planning the questions (Ducharme, 2017). Thoughtful questioning can guide the therapeutic process and uncover important insights. If a patient’s case is challenging, a practitioner should refer the patient to another therapist. Referrals ensure that clients receive the most appropriate care for their needs.

Dissociative disorders can impair the behavior of patients. These impairments can manifest in various ways, affecting personal and professional life. Therapists have a responsibility to apply ethical and legal considerations to promote quality care to the patients. Adhering to ethical guidelines ensures that patients’ rights and well-being are prioritized. The first responsibility is the duty to warn (McDermott et al., 2018). This duty involves notifying authorities if a patient poses a risk to themselves or others. Patients with dissociative disorders can present various risks to themselves or others. These risks necessitate careful assessment and intervention. Another ethical consideration is maleficence and beneficence (McDermott et al., 2018). Therapists must balance the potential benefits and harms of their interventions. Therapists should use their professional expertise to ensure the safety of their patients and prevent harm. This involves ongoing evaluation and adjustment of treatment plans. Practitioners should build trust by providing the best medication to alleviate the symptoms. Trust is reinforced when patients see tangible improvements in their condition. The development of a treatment plan should consider the patient’s autonomy and informed consent (McDermott et al., 2018). Respecting autonomy involves involving patients in decisions about their care. Practitioners should involve a patient or a guardian if the patient is unable to make decisions. This ensures that the patient’s best interests are always considered. Treatment should be dynamic to incorporate diverse cultural beliefs. Cultural competence enhances the relevance and effectiveness of care. Provision of care should ensure care, justice, and accommodative approach. An accommodative approach respects individual differences and promotes equity. Justice in the healthcare sector is crucial to ensure the provision of care to all patients irrespective of their ethnic background and gender (McDermott et al., 2018). Ensuring justice helps to eliminate disparities in healthcare access and outcomes. Ethical and legal considerations improve quality of care and patient satisfaction. These considerations are integral to the integrity and success of therapeutic interventions.