Week 6 Blog Post

The piece for this week from Lewis focuses on the removal of homosexuality from the DSM and the role it played in the lgbtq movement. The relationship between the movement and the institution of the DSM is highlighted through the way one views a diagnosis in the manual. Lewis references quotes from individual’s reactions within a newsletter who describe a degree of skepticism associated with the impact of the removal: “Beyond simply registering exasperation at the revision’s belatedness, these comments elicit considerable skepticism about the redemptive power of psychiatric sanction” (84). So, it is noted that even the reversal of the diagnosis in the manual cannot completely undo perceptions of homosexuality initially being considered a mental illness. This allows one to recognize the extent to which an institution like the DSM holds authority in the causes of social movements. Institutional genres especially hold a greater authority than others because they are received by the public as truth or closer to the truth than other genres. This brings a greater need for advocacy in a given movement. However, the reversal of homosexuality as a diagnosis does not just impact views of same-sex relationships, but it can affect the public’s perception of the DSM but the whole field of psychiatry. For a manual like the DSM to reverse diagnoses could illustrate a degree of uncertainty in the entire field of psychiatry and lessen the authority it holds. So, the way one views psychiatry and mental illness could be entirely altered to the point where one questions many to all of the diagnoses in the manual.