Résumés
Résumé
Cet article aborde le thème de la réduction diagnostique en psychiatrie, un processus par lequel des situations forcément complexes et multifactorielles sont réduites à des conditions médicales. Ce processus présente des écueils évidents, mais aussi certaines fonctions, notamment celle de circonscrire ce sur quoi porte légitimement ou non le jugement psychiatrique. Nous discuterons parallèlement des distinctions entre souffrance narrative et pathologique, ainsi que des jugements moraux et médicaux qui peuvent leur être associés. Ceci mènera à argumenter en faveur d’une attitude pragmatique par rapport à la classification diagnostique psychiatrique, c’est-à-dire par rapport au vocable standardisé servant à catégoriser et identifier les troubles dits de santé mentale. Nous dégagerons par la suite des implications pour la pratique clinique, notamment qu’une discussion transparente de ces aspects avec certains patients peut bénéficier à la relation thérapeutique et permettre aux personnes atteintes de troubles mentaux d’envisager un narratif qui n’ait pas à se limiter à une condition psychiatrique ni à se constituer par le rejet de cette dernière, mais puisse lui laisser une place légitime. Ultimement, nous souhaitons que la sensibilisation des cliniciens aux enjeux éthiques inhérents au diagnostic psychiatrique permette de limiter le caractère potentiellement péjoratif et déshumanisant de la réduction diagnostique, en leur permettant d’adopter des attitudes réflexives et transparentes sur ces questions.
Mots-clés :
- éthique,
- psychiatrie,
- réduction diagnostique,
- narratif,
- stigma
Abstract
This article addresses the theme of diagnostic reduction in psychiatry, a process by which necessarily complex and multifactorial situations are reduced to medical conditions. This process presents obvious pitfalls, but also certain functions, in particular that of circumscribing what the psychiatric judgment can legitimately or not focus upon. In parallel, I will discuss the distinctions between narrative and pathological suffering, as well as the moral and medical judgments that may be associated with them. This will lead me to argue in favour of a pragmatic attitude with regard to psychiatric diagnostic classification, i.e., with regard to the standardized term used to categorize and identify so-called mental health disorders. I will then highlight the implications for clinical practice, notably that a transparent discussion of these aspects with certain patients can benefit the therapeutic relationship and allow people with mental disorders to envisage a narrative that does not have to be limited to a psychiatric condition or be constituted by the rejection of the latter, but which can leave it a legitimate place. Ultimately, I hope that raising clinicians’ awareness of the ethical issues inherent in psychiatric diagnosis will limit the potentially pejorative and dehumanizing nature of diagnostic reduction, by allowing them to adopt reflexive and transparent attitudes on these issues.
Keywords:
- ethics,
- psychiatry,
- diagnostic reduction,
- narrative,
- stigma
Parties annexes
Bibliographie
- 1. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-5. 5th ed. American Psychiatric Association. 2013.
- 2. Phillips J, Frances A, Cerullo MA, Chardavoyne J, Decker HS, First MB et al. The six most essential questions in psychiatric diagnosis: a pluralogue part 1: conceptual and definitional issues in psychiatric diagnosis. Philos Ethics Humanit Med. 2012;7:3.
- 3. Phillips J, Frances A, Cerullo MA et al. The six most essential questions in psychiatric diagnosis: a pluralogue part 2: issues of conservatism and pragmatism in psychiatric diagnosis. Philos Ethics Humanit Med. 2012;7:8.
- 4. Phillips J, Frances A, Cerullo MA et al. The six most essential questions in psychiatric diagnosis: a pluralogue part 3: issues of utility and alternative approaches in psychiatric diagnosis. Philos Ethics Humanit Med. 2012;7:9.
- 5. Phillips J, Frances A, Cerullo MA et al. The six most essential questions in psychiatric diagnosis: a pluralogue part 4: general conclusion. Philos Ethics Humanit Med. 2012;7:4.
- 6. Szasz T. The Myth Of Mental Illness: Foundations Of A Theory Of Personal Conduct. Harper and Row. 1974.
- 7. Zachar P. Psychiatric disorders: natural kinds made by the world or practical kinds made by us?. World Psychiatry. 2015;14(3):288-290.
- 8. Zachar P, Kendler K. The removal of Pluto from the class of the planets and homosexuality from the class of psychiatric disorders: a comparison. Philos Ethics Humanit Med. 2012;7:4.
- 9. Pellegrino E, Thomasma D. A Philosophical Basis of Medical Practice. Oxford. Oxford University Press. 1981.
- 10. Paris J. Psychiatry and neurosciences. Can J Psychiatry. 2009;54(8): 513-517.
- 11. Gold I. Reduction in psychiatry. Can J Psychiatry. 2009;54(8):506-12.
- 12. Pellegrino E. The internal morality of clinical medicine: a paradigm for the ethics of the helping and healing professions. J Med Philos. 2001;26(6):559-579.
- 13. Radden J. Recognition rights, mental health consumers and reconstructive cultural semantics. Philos Ethics Humanit Med. 2012;7:6.
- 14. Zachar P. A Metaphysics Of Psychopathology. Cambridge. The MIT Press. 2014.
- 15. Hesslow G. Do we need a concept of disease? Theor Med. 1993;14:1-14.
- 16. Sulmasy D. Edmund Pellegrino’s philosophy and ethics of medicine: an overview. Kennedy Inst Ethics J. 2014;24(2):105-112.
- 17. Sulmasy D. Futility and the varieties of medical judgement. Theor Med. 1997;18:63-78.
- 18. Schwartz P. Decision and discovery in defining “disease”. In Kinkaid H and McKitrick J, eds. Establishing Medical Reality. Amsterdam. Springer. 2007. 47-63
- 19. Machamer P, Darden L, Craver C. Thinking about mechanisms. Philos Sci. 2000;67(1):1-25.