1. Patients launch a $1.27 million crowdfunding campaign for ME/CFS gut microbiome study.
    Check out the website, Facebook and Twitter. Join in donate and spread the word!
ME/CFS and the Magic of the Canine Factor
There's been plenty of research indicating that having pets is good for your health. I never really noticed any particular benefits to having cats, though that may have had more to do with my cats. They've been fairly indifferent to my presence and we've shared a live-and-let-live...
Discuss the article on the Forums.

APA forces domain name change for "DSM-5 and ICD-11 Watch" site + Allen Frances blog

Discussion in 'Action Alerts and Advocacy' started by Dx Revision Watch, Jan 3, 2012.

  1. Dx Revision Watch

    Dx Revision Watch Suzy Chapman dxrevisionwatch.com

    Messages:
    1,718
    Likes:
    375
    UK
    From Suzy Chapman for

    Dx Revision Watch

    http://dxrevisionwatch.wordpress.com/



    03 January 2012

    APA forces domain name change for "Dx Revision Watch" site + Commentary from Allen Frances, MD, who had chaired the DSM-IV Task Force

    On December 22, with just one working day left before offices closed down for the Christmas and New Year holidays, I received two communications from the Licensing and Permissions department of American Psychiatric Publishing, A Division of American Psychiatric Association, informing me that the unauthorized use of the DSM 5 mark in my domain name is improper and in violation of United States Trademark Law.

    I was advised that my actions may subject me to contributory infringement liability including increased damages for wilful infringement. I was requested to immediately cease and desist any and all use of the DSM 5 mark, remove the DSM 5 mark from my domain name and provide documentation confirming I had done so, and that any further use would be considered an infringement.

    Given the difficulties of liaising from the UK with American Psychiatric Publishing and with my Californian based site hosts, WordPress, over the holiday and mindful of the implied consequences should I delay taking action, I considered I had little option but to change the sites domain and title.

    Since December 23, this site has been operating under the title Dx Revision Watch and the sites domain name has been changed to

    http://dxrevisionwatch.wordpress.com/

    As a result of changing the domain name, links on websites, forums and social media platforms for posts published prior to December 23 and for pages cached on Google and other search engines before that date will no longer point to this site and will return a site deleted or 404 message.

    If you have bookmarked or are linking to my site please update your links.

    Today, on Psychology Today, Dr Allen Frances, who chaired the DSM-IV Task Force, has blogged on the action the APA has taken against me:


    http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/dsm5-in-distress/201201/is-dsm-5-public-trust-or-apa-cash-cow


    DSM5 in Distress

    The DSM's impact on mental health practice and research.

    by Allen Frances, M.D.


    Is DSM 5 A Public Trust Or An APA Cash Cow?
    Commercialism And Censorship Trump Concern For Quality


    Published on January 3, 2012 by Allen J. Frances, M.D. in DSM5 in Distress

    DSM 5 will have a big impact on how millions of lives are led and how scarce mental health resources are spent. Getting the right diagnosis and treatment can be life enhancing, even life saving. Incorrect diagnosis can lead to the prescription of unnecessary and potentially harmful medication and to the diversion of services away from those who really need them and toward those who are better left alone. Preparing DSM 5 should be a public trust of the highest order.

    But DSM 5 is also an enormously profitable commercial venture. DSMs are perpetual best sellers (at least one hundred thousand copies sold every year) netting the American Psychiatric Association yearly profits exceeding five million dollars.

    From the very start of work on DSM 5, APA took unprecedented steps to protect its commercial interest- but in the process betrayed its obligation to the public trust. Work group members were recruited only on condition that they first sign confidentiality agreements - thereby squelching the free flow of ideas that is absolutely necessary to produce a quality diagnostic manual. 'Intellectual property' has been the priority - a safe, scientifically sound DSM 5 has been the victim.

    DSM 5 commercialism and heavy handed censorship have recently assumed a new and troubling form. APA is exercising its 'DSM 5' trademark to unfairly stifle an extremely valuable source of information. Suzy Chapman, a patient advocate from England, runs a highly respected and authoritative site providing the best available information on the preparation of both DSM and ICD. Her writings can always be relied upon for fairness, accuracy, timeliness, and clarity. The site has gained a grateful following with over 40,000 views in its first two years.

    Ms Chapman recently sent me the following email describing her David vs Goliath struggle with the APA and its disturbing implications both for DSM 5 and for internet freedom:

    "Until last week, my website published under the domain name http://dxrevisionwatch.wordpress.com/.

    On December 22, I was stunned to receive two emails from the Licensing and Permissions department of American Psychiatric Publishing, claiming that the domain name my site operates under was infringing upon the DSM 5 trademark in violation of United States Trademark Law and that my unauthorized actions may subject me to contributory infringement liability including increased damages for willful infringement. I was told to cease and desist immediately all use of the DSM 5 mark and to provide documentation within ten days confirming I had done so."

    "Given my limited resources compared with APA's deep pockets, I had no choice but to comply and was forced to change my site's domain name to http://dxrevisionwatch.wordpress.com.

    Hits to the new site have plummeted dramatically and it will take months for traffic to recover - just at the time when crucial DSM 5 decisions are being made."

    "Was APA justified in seeking to exercise its trademark rights in this situation? Or do APA's actions fly in the face of accepted internet trademark practice, common sense, and good public relations? I am not a lawyer, but I have made a careful study of 'U.S. Trademark Law, Rules of Practice & Federal Statutes, U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, November 8, 2011' and of many other available sources. My conclusion is that APA is making excessive and unwarranted claims for its DSM 5 trademark. Courts have found that using a trademark in a domain or subdomain name is 'fair use' if the purpose is non commercial, where there is no intent to mislead, where use of the mark is pertinent to the subject of discussion, and where it is clear that the user is not implying endorsement by, or affiliation with, the holder of the mark."

    "The home page of my site clearly defines its purpose - 'Dx Revision Watch - Monitoring the development of DSM-5, ICD-11, ICD-10-CM' and carries this disclaimer,

    'This site has no connection with and is not endorsed by the American Psychiatric Association (APA), American Psychiatric Publishing Inc., World Health Organization (WHO) or any other organization, institution, corporation or company. This site has no affiliations with any commercial or not-for-profit organization...This site does not accept advertising, sponsorship, funding or donations and has no commercial links with any organization, institution, corporation, company or individual.'"

    "It puzzles and worries me that APA would seek to suppress my clearly non commercial resource created only to provide information and commentary on the revision process of two internationally used classifications. My only purpose is to inform interested stakeholders and those patient groups whose medical and social care may potentially be impacted by proposals for changes to diagnostic categories and criteria."

    "There is a paradox here. The APA has promoted its commitment to transparency of process, but has rarely demonstrated it. Much has been made of the posting of drafts for public review and soliciting feedback. But to usefully participate in this process, patients, patient groups, and advocacy organizations need to know about proposed changes and when and by what means they can input comment during public review periods. Now, because of APA's arbitrary actions, it will be harder for them to find the information they need- just when they most need it."

    I am surprised and saddened by APA's ill-conceived attempt to restrict Suzy Chapman's free expression on DSM 5. It can only be in the service of the equally unworthy goals of censorship and/or commercialism. I simply can't imagine that anything should ever be kept secret in the preparation of a diagnostic manual and wonder what in Suzy Chapman's web site could possibly be so frightening to APA.

    Using a trademark to suppress comment is a violation of APA's public trust to produce the best possible DSM 5. This is another indication that DSM has become too important for public health and for public policy for its revisions to be left under the exclusive control of one professional organization - particularly when that organization's own financial future is at stake. This basic conflict of interest can be cured only by creating a new institutional framework to supervise the future DSM revisions. Censorship and commercial motivations must not warp the development of a safe and scientifically sound diagnostic manual.

    [ENDS]


    References:

    1]Legal Guide for Bloggers:
    https://www.eff.org/issues/bloggers/legal/liability/IP
    2]U.S. Trademark Law, Rules of Practice & Federal Statutes, U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, November 8, 2011 PDF:
    http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/law/tmlaw.pdf

    3] Dx Revision Watch: http://dxrevisionwatch.wordpress.com/
    4] Dr Allen Frances MD, former chair, DSM-IV Task Force, blogs at "DSM5 in Distress" on "Psychology Today": http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/dsm5-in-distress
    5] APA's DSM-5 Development site: http://www.dsm5.org/Pages/Default.aspx
    6] Somatic Symptom Disorders current proposals: http://www.dsm5.org/ProposedRevision/Pages/SomaticSymptomDisorders.aspx

    Suzy Chapman
    _____________________

    http://dxrevisionwatch.wordpress.com/
    http://meagenda.wordpress.com
    http://www.facebook.com/MEagenda
    http://twitter.com/MEagenda
    taniaaust1 and Wildcat like this.
  2. Dreambirdie

    Dreambirdie work in progress

    Messages:
    4,918
    Likes:
    2,973
    N. California
    "I am surprised and saddened by APA's ill-conceived attempt to restrict Suzy Chapman's free expression on DSM 5. It can only be in the service of the equally unworthy goals of censorship and/or commercialism. I simply can't imagine that anything should ever be kept secret in the preparation of a diagnostic manual and wonder what in Suzy Chapman's web site could possibly be so frightening to APA."

    Insanely controlling behavior on the part of the APA. What disorder do THEY have?

    I am sorry it is such an ongoing ugly ordeal for you, Suzy. Thanks for all you do.
    beaker and Wildcat like this.
  3. xrayspex

    xrayspex Senior Member

    Messages:
    659
    Likes:
    70
    u.s.a.
    Sorry to hear that Suzy. yep, its pretty classic oppression of the worst kind :(
    beaker and Wildcat like this.
  4. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,100
    Likes:
    4,902
    That's disgusting... for them to use claims about copyright to try to limit criticism.

    What a loathsome thing to do.
    beaker and Wildcat like this.
  5. Roy S

    Roy S former DC ME/CFS lobbyist

    Messages:
    427
    Likes:
    401
    Illinois, USA
    I think this is an outrageous abuse of power.

    Hang in there, Suzy.
    beaker likes this.
  6. justinreilly

    justinreilly Stop the IoM & P2P! Adopt CCC!

    Messages:
    2,490
    Likes:
    1,167
    NYC (& RI)
    This is horrible. They are upset that when you google "DSM 5", her website is the first that pops up! They are just trying to stifle the truth so they can continue to say we're nuts. I wrote to Prof. Francis in support of Suzy and against their BS new diagnoses. Pls join me.

    http://www.psychologytoday.com/experts/allen-j-frances-md
    beaker likes this.
  7. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,100
    Likes:
    4,902
    Prof Frances already sounded opposed to the DSM's actions. I think I've read other things from him critical of the DSM revisions... although have read others who are critical of him for wanting to maintain his DSM IV royalties. It's all so complicated... no wonder no-one can be bothered to provide effective over-sight.
  8. justinreilly

    justinreilly Stop the IoM & P2P! Adopt CCC!

    Messages:
    2,490
    Likes:
    1,167
    NYC (& RI)
    Yes, I was just writing to thank him and in support of Suzy and to alert him to the 'somatic symptom disorder' problem and ask him to write about it on his blog, etc.
    Wildcat likes this.
  9. biophile

    biophile Places I'd rather be.

    Messages:
    1,350
    Likes:
    3,993
    Erasing the interface between APA/APP and douchebaggery

    Not a word I use often but I couldn't think of anything better.

    Anyway this censorship move is bizarre. It does not seem like they even have a case, they just used authoritarian threats to trick Suzy out of a perfectly good domain name.

    Is there any way to fight this without it causing economic ruin? Can www.eff.org help?

    Perhaps I should purchase a new domain ... www.dsm5-are-a-bunch-of.info !
    Wildcat and justinreilly like this.
  10. justinreilly

    justinreilly Stop the IoM & P2P! Adopt CCC!

    Messages:
    2,490
    Likes:
    1,167
    NYC (& RI)
    Here's the note I wrote the author:

    http://www.psychologytoday.com/experts/allen-j-frances-md

    taniaaust1, Glynis Steele and Wildcat like this.
  11. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,100
    Likes:
    4,902
    Excellent. I was a bit unclear from your post, and didn't want anyone else to think they should be blaming him (his page mentions his work on DSM IV, so it would be easy to get confused).
  12. Sean

    Sean Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,155
    Likes:
    1,693
    Purely coincidental timing, of course.

    Appreciate your work on this.
    justinreilly likes this.
  13. Wildcat

    Wildcat Senior Member

    Messages:
    587
    Likes:
    453
    .
    I must say that does look like extraordinary 'off the wall' behaviour from the Licensing and Permissions department of American Psychiatric Publishing. Surely, a site (domain) that reports in a very factual and responsible way to inform the public about the ongoing process of revising the DSM (ie reports about the developments of possible changes) would have to use the term 'DSM-V' in its domain name to indicate to the Google searching and reading public (and professionals) what the site is actually about.
    .
  14. Dx Revision Watch

    Dx Revision Watch Suzy Chapman dxrevisionwatch.com

    Messages:
    1,718
    Likes:
    375
    UK
    On Psychology Today, Allen Frances, MD, who had chaired the DSM-IV Task Force, has blogged on the actions American Psychiatric Publishing has threatened against my site; several other psychiatrists and psychologists have since blogged in support:


    The Carlat Psychiatry Blog
    Keeping Psychiatry Honest Since 2007

    APA Threatens to Sue "dsm5watch" Website

    http://carlatpsychiatry.blogspot.com/2012/01/apa-threatens-to-sue-dsm5watch-website.html

    The Carlat Psychiatry Blog: APA Threatens to Sue "dsm5watch" Website

    ------------------

    University Diaries

    A professor of English describes university life.
    Aim: To change things.

    The Stalking Cure

    Margaret Solton

    http://www.margaretsoltan.com/?p=34364

    ------------------

    Health Care Renewal

    Addressing threats to health care's core values, especially those stemming from concentration and abuse of power. Advocating for accountability, integrity, transparency, honesty and ethics in leadership and governance of health care.

    SELF INFLICTED DAMAGE

    Bernard Carroll

    http://hcrenewal.blogspot.com/2012/01/self-inflicted-damage.html

    ------------------

    DSM-5

    1 Boring Old Man (A retired psychiatrist's musings)

    http://1boringoldman.com/index.php/2012/01/03/dsm-5/

    ------------------

    APA Use Restraints on Blogger

    SEROXAT SUFFERERS STAND UP AND BE COUNTED
    A blog by Bob Fiddaman

    Bob Fiddaman

    http://fiddaman.blogspot.com/2012/01/apa-use-restraints-on-blogger.html

    ------------------

    DSM5 in Distress
    The DSMs impact on mental health practice and research.

    by Allen Frances, M.D (former chair, DSM-IV Task Force)

    Is DSM 5 A Public Trust Or An APA Cash Cow?
    Commercialism And Censorship Trump Concern For Quality


    http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/dsm5-in-distress/201201/is-dsm-5-public-trust-or-apa-cash-cow
    Wildcat and justinreilly like this.
  15. Dx Revision Watch

    Dx Revision Watch Suzy Chapman dxrevisionwatch.com

    Messages:
    1,718
    Likes:
    375
    UK
    Legal information and resources for bloggers and site owners:

    1] Wipedia article: Cease and desist
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cease_and_desist

    2] Wipedia article: Strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_public_participation

    3] Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Frontier_Foundation
    http://www.eff.org/

    EFF Bloggers Rights
    https://www.eff.org/bloggers

    EFF Legal Guide for Bloggers
    https://www.eff.org/issues/bloggers/legal

    4] Chilling Effects
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilling_Effects_(group)
    http://chillingeffects.org/

    5] U.S. Trademark Law, Rules of Practice & Federal Statutes, U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, November 2011: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/law/tmlaw.pdf
    Wildcat likes this.
  16. Dx Revision Watch

    Dx Revision Watch Suzy Chapman dxrevisionwatch.com

    Messages:
    1,718
    Likes:
    375
    UK
    Psychiatric creep Erasing the interface between psychiatry and medicine

    January 03, 2012

    http://wp.me/pKrrB-1A5
    Wildcat likes this.
  17. Merry

    Merry Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,357
    Likes:
    607
    Columbus, Ohio, USA
    Wow. Sorry, Suzy. Good luck. Thanks for all the work you do.
  18. justinreilly

    justinreilly Stop the IoM & P2P! Adopt CCC!

    Messages:
    2,490
    Likes:
    1,167
    NYC (& RI)
    Right. Thanks.
  19. Dx Revision Watch

    Dx Revision Watch Suzy Chapman dxrevisionwatch.com

    Messages:
    1,718
    Likes:
    375
    UK
    Update on APA Publishing's "cease and desist" action re Suzy Chapman's domain name

    From Suzy Chapman for

    Dx Revision Watch
    http://dxrevisionwatch.wordpress.com/

    05 January 2012

    (Note: I am unable to disclose the contents of the second letter since it relates, in part, to a third party.)

    On January 03, I reported that just before Christmas, the Licensing and Permission's department of American Psychiatric Publishing, A Division of American Psychiatric Association, issued two "cease and desist" letters, claiming that my use of their registered trademark "DSM 5" within my website domain name was improper and in violation of United States Trademark Law, and that my unauthorized actions may subject me to contributory infringement liability including increased damages for wilful infringement.

    I was requested to immediately cease and desist any and all use of the DSM 5 mark and that the DSM 5 mark is removed from the domain name http://dxrevisionwatch.wordpress.com/.

    Whether American Psychiatric Publishing might be considered to have a case against me or whether my use of the "DSM 5 mark" within my domain name would be considered by a court to be legitimate and "fair use", given that my site is non commercial, carries a clear disclaimer, with no intent to confuse, mislead or misrepresent my relationship with the APA, or its publishing arm, I elected, for a number of reasons, to change the URL of my site the following day, in compliance with American Psychiatric Publishing's demands.

    Dr Allen Frances, MD, who had chaired the Task Force that had oversight of the development of DSM-IV, and a fierce critic of the DSM-5 development process, has publicly supported my position in a commentary published on his blog, on Psychology Today, on January 03.

    Since then, websites, blogs and Twitter have been buzzing with indignation for the APA's heavy-handed action against a responsible site owner.

    I've received a lot of support, too, from other psychiatrists and professionals in articles and comments, and from writers like Gary Greenberg, and their support has been much appreciated.

    Commentaries are being collated on my site in this post:

    Media coverage: American Psychiatric Association (APA) cease and desist v DSM-5 Watch website; Legal information and resources for bloggers and site owners:

    http://wp.me/pKrrB-1Bi


    You can read Dr Frances' commentary, here:

    Is DSM 5 A Public Trust Or An APA Cash Cow?

    Commercialism And Censorship Trump Concern For Quality:

    http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/dsm5-in-distress/201201/is-dsm-5-public-trust-or-apa-cash-cow

    I am surprised and saddened by APAs ill-conceived attempt to restrict Suzy Chapmans free expression on DSM 5. It can only be in the service of the equally unworthy goals of censorship and/or commercialism. I simply cant imagine that anything should ever be kept secret in the preparation of a diagnostic manual and wonder what in Suzy Chapmans web site could possibly be so frightening to APA.

    Using a trademark to suppress comment is a violation of APAs public trust to produce the best possible DSM 5. This is another indication that DSM has become too important for public health and for public policy for its revisions to be left under the exclusive control of one professional organization particularly when that organizations own financial future is at stake. This basic conflict of interest can be cured only by creating a new institutional framework to supervise the future DSM revisions. Censorship and commercial motivations must not warp the development of a safe and scientifically sound diagnostic manual.


    -----------------

    Dr Dan Carlat, MD, The Carlat Psychiatry Blog

    APA Threatens to Sue "dsm5watch" website
    http://carlatpsychiatry.blogspot.com/2012/01/apa-threatens-to-sue-dsm5watch-website.html

    It all seems rather heavy-handed to me. After all, the New York Times appears to have no problem with the anti-Times site called TimesWatch. In a democratic society, healthy dissent and debate is part of the package. It may be annoying, but that doesnt excuse the bullying tactics that the APA has chosen.

    -----------------

    Dr Bernard Carroll, MD, Health Care Renewal

    Self Inflicted Damage
    http://hcrenewal.blogspot.com/2012/01/self-inflicted-damage.html

    It is bad enough that the APA resorts to this legal artifice to stifle public discussion. When they do it through their lawyers and business entities rather than through their medical and scientific officers, they sink to a lower level yet. The parallels with corporate sleaze that we have discussed so often on this blog are obvious. For shame.

    -----------------

    1 Boring Old Man, retired psychiatrist


    DSM-5
    http://1boringoldman.com/index.php/2012/01/03/dsm-5/

    Phrases like of all the lame-brained, youve got to be kidding, or what were they thinking? came immediately to mind on reading this most recent post from Dr. Allen Frances in Psychology Today. After pondering for a bit, I still cant find anything sensible about playing the trademark card on DSM-5.

    -----------------

    Howard Brody, MD, PhD, on Hooked: Ethics, Medicine and Pharma blog

    Updates and Commentary related to HOOKED: ETHICS, THE MEDICAL PROFESSION, AND THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY, by Howard Brody, MD, PhD (Rowman and Littlefield, January, 2007)

    From Health Care Renewal: Egregious Behavior of the APA
    http://brodyhooked.blogspot.com/2012/01/from-health-care-renewal-egregious.html

    "Dr. Carroll makes a number of on-target observations in his post. He notes that this action by the APA amounts to what's called "SLAPP," which as I discussed in HOOKED means "strategic lawsuit against public participation." In this case it would be a threatened SLAPP rather than a true SLAPP, as no lawsuit was filed, but the fear of having to go up individually against the deep legal pockets of the APA forced the UK blogger to knuckle under promptly."

    -----------------

    Jack Carney, DSW, social worker who writes on Behavioral.net:

    1984 Revisted, II: Big Brother on the Run
    http://tinyurl.com/jackcarney

    The American Psychiatric Association keeps on undermining its credibility, or more to the point, plays a mean big brother.

    -----------------

    SEROXAT SUFFERERS STAND UP AND BE COUNTED
    A blog by Bob Fiddaman


    APA Uses Restraints on Blogger
    http://fiddaman.blogspot.com/2012/01/apa-use-restraints-on-blogger.html

    The field of psychiatry is doing itself no favours by using intimidation tactics against people that criticize their opinion, lets face it, the whole premise of psychiatry is based on opinion, Ive not yet seen any scientific evidence of the chemical imbalance the field of psychiatry tout when someone is depressed or has a psychiatric disorder.

    Chapmans blog can be read at her new web address HERE. Her work/opinion continues to spread, much to the annoyance of the APA who have probably shot themselves in the foot with their intimidation tactics.

    Memo to the APA Intimidate a blogger and you put them on a pedastal, you highlight what it is that they have to say here endeth your first lesson in psychology."


    -----------------

    Today, author Gary Greenberg published a two part article on his website read Part 1 here:

    Pity the poor American Psychiatric Association, Part 1
    http://www.garygreenbergonline.com/w/?p=188

    with Part Two, published below, with Gary's kind permission:

    Pity the American Psychiatric Association, Part 2
    http://www.garygreenbergonline.com/w/?p=192

    January 5th, 2012

    In the last installment, we found out that the APA is trying to thread a camel through the eye of a needle. In their own view, they have to revise the DSM. To do this, they have to address the reification problem i.e., that many of us, civilians and clinicians alike, have taken the DSM too seriously and treated the disorders it lists as actual diseases rather than fictive placeholders. To address it, they have to admit that it is a problem, and that they dont have a solution. They have to fix the plane while it is airborne, but they dont have the tools or the knowhow to do so, and the more it becomes clear that the plane is in trouble, and the more the mechanics are swearing and banging belowdecks, the more likely it is that the passengers will find out and start asking for a quick landing and a voucher on another airline.

    So it is very important to try to keep the passengers in the dark as long as possible. Or, to put it another way, the APA has a product to protect, and the best way to do that, from a corporations point of view, is to control the narrative, as the pundits say, about the DSM.

    Now, even before the recent events, which Ill get to in a second, I knew this, because last year I wrote an article about the DSM revision for Wired about the argument between Allen Frances and Michael First, the major players in the DSM-IV revision, and Darrel Regier and David Kupfer, their counterparts on DSM-5. The article was no great shakes, just your usual lunchbucket magazine piece, fair and balanced and bland and forgettable as a soy hot dog with Frenchs mustard on it. I think Frances came out a little better, but thats because I think hes closer to the truth of the matter, and, as one of his colleagues has reminded me about a million times, hes retired, so he can afford to speak truth to power. And the APA sounded at least reasonable in its willingness to acknowledge that the DSM is more provisional than it is generally made out to be.

    Anyway, the forgettable magazine piece is in the process of becoming a book which will probably also be forgettable. And so I went back to my transcripts of conversations with the APA/DSM folks and of course found out all the questions Id failed to ask and the points Id failed to get clarified. So I emailed the APA pr apparatchicks and asked them to enlighten me. When exactly did the APA stop taking money from the drug companies for their educational programs, and how exactly was the embargo worded? And did I understand Regier correctly about a highly technical point that I wont bore you with.

    Heres what I got back for a response.


    Dear Gary,

    We have received several requests from you for access to APA experts and positions on issues related to the DSM for the book youre writing. I wanted you to know that we will not be working with you on this project. Last year we gave you free access to several of our officers and DSM experts for the article you wrote for Wired. In spite of the fact that we went to considerable lengths to work with you, the article you produced was deeply negative and biased toward the APA. Because of this track record, we are not interested in working with you further as we have no reason to expect that we would be treated any more fairly in your book than we were in the Wired article.​


    Now, why the APA would want to hand me such first-rate evidence of its own paranoia and spare me having to listen to their talking points, not to mention preemptively decline to have a crack at responding to my book is beyond me. Its as incomprehensible as the letter itself, or at least the part where they complain that I was biased toward them. But I gather they think that they will make it harder for me to write my book, that maybe if they dont cooperate I wont do it. It is in any event evidence of an awfully thin skin, and of a bunker mentality. More disturbingly, it is evidence that they dont really take their public trust too seriously. Especially when you contrast this to the National institutes of Mental Health, and its director Tom Insel, of whose work Ive been much more directly critical, and who took the time to read it, and who still bent over backwards to get me an hour of face time that was cordial and fascinating. Its enough to make you a fan of the government.

    So to the recent events. Suzy Chapman is a patient advocate from the UK. Her website was an excellent compendium of information, archival material, reports, and, yes, criticism of the DSM-5. I have been using it in my research and admiring her tenacity and her fairmindedness. She has opinions but they are way in the background and neither shrill nor strident.

    Chapman called her website DSM-5 and ICD Watch: Monitoring the Development of DSM-5, ICD-11 and ICD-10-CM. (The ICDs are diagnostic systems run by the World Health Organization, and they are also under revision), and her subdomain name was

    http://dxrevisionwatch.wordpress.com

    She also put in a disclaimer, made it clear that she had nothing to do with APA, that she wasnt dispensing medical, legal, or technical advice. But that didnt stop the APA from going after her. Not long after they got their DSM-5 trademark approved, and right before Christmas, they sent her this nice holiday card, which shes kindly allowed me to post here, with her redactions.


    Name: Redacted
    Email: Redacted
    Message: December 22, 2011


    Suzy Chapman http://dxrevisionwatch.wordpress.com/


    RE: DSM 5 Trademark Violation

    Dear Ms. Chapman:
    It has come to our attention that the website http://dxrevisionwatch.wordpress.com/ is infringing upon the American Psychiatric Associations trademark DSM 5 (serial number 85161695) and is in violation of federal law by using it as a domain name.

    According to our records, the American Psychiatric Association has not authorized this use of the DSM 5 trademark. Consequently, this use of the DSM 5 mark is improper and is in violation of United States Trademark Law. Your unauthorized actions may subject you to contributory infringement liability including increased damages for willful infringement. We request that you immediately cease and desist any and all use of the DSM 5 mark. Furthermore, we request that the DSM 5 mark is removed from the domain name http://dxrevisionwatch.wordpress.com/ . The American Psychiatric Association has a good-faith belief that the above-identified websites use of the DSM 5 name and marks is not authorized by the American Psychiatric Association, its agents, or the law. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct and that I am authorized to act on behalf of the American Psychiatric Association.

    Please confirm, within the next ten (10) days of the date of this letter, that you will stop using our trademark in http://dxrevisionwatch.wordpress.com/ , and provide documentation confirming that you have. Any further use will be considered an infringement.

    Thank you for your prompt cooperation in resolving this issue.

    Very truly yours,

    [Redacted]
    Licensing and Permissions Manager American Psychiatric Publishing, A Division of American Psychiatric Association
    1000 Wilson Boulevard Suite 1825 Arlington, VA 22209
    E-mail: Redacted

    -----------------------

    Chapman, not in a position to fight, complied almost immediately. Her website is now available at

    http://dxrevisionwatch.wordpress.com/

    where you can also read about this kerfuffle in more detail.

    Why the APA would make themselves into a Goliath is not clear to me. The DSM offers Paranoid Personality Disorder, but this episode makes me wish Frances hadnt shied away from his proposal for a Self-Defeating Personality Disorder. Because it is not clear to me how they win this one. Not that I really care, at least not about the APAs fortunes, but are they trying to prove Frances right about his recent, somewhat incendiary, claim that the APA no longer deserves the DSM franchise?

    I did ask one of the APAs trustees about this. He wrote:

    As for whether the intellectual property angle was driving them to crush the lady in Great Britain or their wanting to crush her because she was being critical, I think when the history is finally known, it will be the former. Maybe we can think of someone using DSM-5? who is friendly and note the reaction.

    I do like this idea of conducting an experiment. And he may well be correct, that this is the APA worrying about its intellectual property rather than just trying to make Suzy Chapman miserable or squash dissent. Will they go after the sites that have popped up predictably in the wake of publicity of their enforcement action, like www.dsm5sucks.com and the twitter account @dsm5nonsense (whose owner dares the APA to come after them)? But in the meantime, this only proves two points:

    First, this organization is at least terribly tone deaf. Going after Suzy Chapman is sort of like Lowes yanking its ads from a tv show depicting Muslims as normal people a hugely blunderous action taken to please a tiny constituency, which cant possibly earn them anything but scorn and opprobrium. Either they dont know how they come off or they dont care. Either way, its pretty disturbingly arrogant behavior for an organization that has so much to say about how public money is spent.

    Second, the APA is a corporation that, like any other, will do anything to protect itself from harm, real or imagined. And it spends a lot of time imagining dangers. Thats probably because it knows its primary productthe DSM, which accounts for ten percent of its income and a great deal of its cloutis faulty, and it knows that it doesnt quite know how to fix it without risking making it much much worse.

    [Ends]



    Legal information and resources for bloggers and site owners:

    1] Wipedia article: Cease and desist
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cease_and_desist

    2] Wipedia article: Strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_public_participation

    3] Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Frontier_Foundation
    http://www.eff.org/

    EFF Bloggers Rights
    https://www.eff.org/bloggers

    EFF Legal Guide for Bloggers
    https://www.eff.org/issues/bloggers/legal

    4] Chilling Effects
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilling_Effects_(group)
    http://chillingeffects.org/

    5] U.S. Trademark Law, Rules of Practice & Federal Statutes, U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, November 2011: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/law/tmlaw.pdf


    Suzy Chapman
    _____________________

    http://dxrevisionwatch.wordpress.com/
    http://meagenda.wordpress.com
    http://www.facebook.com/MEagenda
    http://twitter.com/MEagenda
    Wildcat likes this.
  20. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,100
    Likes:
    4,902
    It's great to see you're getting more support from others. Hopefully this will end up working against the DSM.
    justinreilly likes this.

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page