
AbstractThere is considerable controversy around psychiatric diagnosis generally and personality disorders specifically. Since its conception, borderline personality disorder has been controversial because of the stigma associated with the diagnosis and the therapeutic nihilism held by practitioners who encounter people with this high prevalence problem in acute settings. This paper reviews the history of the diagnosis of BPD and summarizes some of the controversy surrounding the categorical nature of diagnosis. Both the DSM 5 and ICD‐11 will be discussed; however, for the purposes of this paper, the DSM 5 will take the primary focus due to greater cultural significance. Recent developments in the treatment of borderline personality disorder suggest that it is a highly treatable condition and that full clinical recovery is possible. This paper formulates an argument that despite problems with psychiatric diagnosis that are unlikely to be resolved soon, a diagnosis should be made with an accompanying formulation to enable people to receive timely and effective treatment to enable personal and clinical recovery.
Public health, diagnosis, 150, Nursing, Personality Disorders, FoR 1110 (Nursing), FoR 1117 (Public Health and Health Services), Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, FoR 1701 (Psychology), diagnostic practice, DSM5, Borderline Personality Disorder, Health services and systems, Prevalence, Psychology, Humans, borderline personality disorder
Public health, diagnosis, 150, Nursing, Personality Disorders, FoR 1110 (Nursing), FoR 1117 (Public Health and Health Services), Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, FoR 1701 (Psychology), diagnostic practice, DSM5, Borderline Personality Disorder, Health services and systems, Prevalence, Psychology, Humans, borderline personality disorder
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 60 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% |
