The Nuance

The Drawbacks of ‘Harm Inflation’

Expanding our definitions of harm, trauma, and mental disorder may be a “mixed blessing,” experts say

Markham Heid
Elemental
Published in
5 min readDec 1, 2021

--

Photo: Nik Shuliahin / Unsplash

Several years ago, in 2013, the American Psychiatric Association made a controversial change to its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM).

For years, the DSM’s criteria for diagnosing depression had included what was known as the “bereavement exclusion.” In a nutshell, the exclusion stated that people who had recently lost a loved one should not be diagnosed with major depressive disorder because sorrow and other depression-like symptoms are normal and appropriate following a loss.

In other words, there’s nothing “disordered” about feeling sad or distraught when someone you love has died.

But in the new (and still current) DSM, the APA dropped the bereavement clause. Even among people who are grieving the loss of a loved one, the DSM now considers depression a valid diagnosis if certain criteria are satisfied, such as an “inability to anticipate happiness” or “difficulty being consoled.”

Experts in favor of the change argued that although it might stigmatize some people who are grieving it could also help those in need gain access to therapy…

--

--

Markham Heid
Elemental

I’m a frequent contributor at TIME, the New York Times, and other media orgs. I write mostly about health and science. I like long walks and the Grateful Dead.