Dos diagnósticos aos manuais: mercado farmacêutico e transtornos mentais da infância em questão

IF 4.1 2区社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE

Politics & Society Pub Date : 2021-01-29 DOI:10.5007/2175-7984.2020.E75323

Marcia da Silva Mazon

{"title":"Dos diagnósticos aos manuais: mercado farmacêutico e transtornos mentais da infância em questão","authors":"Marcia da Silva Mazon","doi":"10.5007/2175-7984.2020.E75323","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of the article is to situate the moment of change – both in articles and in research procedures – that marks DSM-III as a way of approaching psychiatric disorders, placing the pharmaceutical industry in the making of new discourses. This is the moment for the reemergence of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and marks the confrontation with the Freudian psychodynamic approach that will be supported by the alternative of tests and statistical procedures. What is the context of these changes? We mobilize authors from economic sociology to think of the drug market as a field of struggle – struggle around the criteria for classifying reality – as well as the dynamics of interaction with the field of health. The article starts from bibliographic research and document analysis. The argument is that the nosology of ADHD, like any other cultural arbitrary, is not neutral and expresses power relations. If several researches point to medical power as biopolitical power, it is possible to see how new arrangements between the pharmaceutical industry and psychiatry expand the scope of the first to reach adolescence and childhood, adding the role of the pharmaceutical industry as biopolitical reinforcement","PeriodicalId":47847,"journal":{"name":"Politics & Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Politics & Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5007/2175-7984.2020.E75323","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 3

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to situate the moment of change – both in articles and in research procedures – that marks DSM-III as a way of approaching psychiatric disorders, placing the pharmaceutical industry in the making of new discourses. This is the moment for the reemergence of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and marks the confrontation with the Freudian psychodynamic approach that will be supported by the alternative of tests and statistical procedures. What is the context of these changes? We mobilize authors from economic sociology to think of the drug market as a field of struggle – struggle around the criteria for classifying reality – as well as the dynamics of interaction with the field of health. The article starts from bibliographic research and document analysis. The argument is that the nosology of ADHD, like any other cultural arbitrary, is not neutral and expresses power relations. If several researches point to medical power as biopolitical power, it is possible to see how new arrangements between the pharmaceutical industry and psychiatry expand the scope of the first to reach adolescence and childhood, adding the role of the pharmaceutical industry as biopolitical reinforcement

查看原文本刊更多论文

从诊断到手册：药品市场与儿童精神障碍

这篇文章的目的是定位改变的时刻——在文章和研究程序上——这标志着DSM-III作为一种接近精神疾病的方式，将制药行业置于新的话语制造中。这是注意力缺陷多动障碍(ADHD)重新出现的时刻，标志着与弗洛伊德精神动力学方法的对抗，弗洛伊德精神动力学方法将得到替代测试和统计程序的支持。这些变化的背景是什么?我们动员经济社会学的作者将毒品市场视为一个斗争领域——围绕现实分类标准的斗争——以及与健康领域相互作用的动态。本文从文献研究和文献分析入手。争论的焦点是ADHD的疾病分类，就像任何其他武断的文化一样，并不是中立的，而是表达了权力关系。如果有几项研究指出医学权力是生物政治权力，那么就有可能看到制药业和精神病学之间的新安排如何扩大了第一个涉及青少年和儿童的范围，增加了制药业作为生物政治强化者的作用

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Politics & Society Multiple-

CiteScore

5.00

自引率

4.20%

发文量

期刊介绍： Politics & Society is a peer-reviewed journal. All submitted papers are read by a rotating editorial board member. If a paper is deemed potentially publishable, it is sent to another board member, who, if agreeing that it is potentially publishable, sends it to a third board member. If and only if all three agree, the paper is sent to the entire editorial board for consideration at board meetings. The editorial board meets three times a year, and the board members who are present (usually between 9 and 14) make decisions through a deliberative process that also considers written reports from absent members. Unlike many journals which rely on 1–3 individual blind referee reports and a single editor with final say, the peers who decide whether to accept submitted work are thus the full editorial board of the journal, comprised of scholars from various disciplines, who discuss papers openly, with author names known, at meetings. Editors are required to disclose potential conflicts of interest when evaluating manuscripts and to recuse themselves from voting if such a potential exists.