Aims

To support the free and open dissemination of research findings and information on alcoholism and alcohol-related problems. To encourage open access to peer-reviewed articles free for all to view.

For full versions of posted research articles readers are encouraged to email requests for "electronic reprints" (text file, PDF files, FAX copies) to the corresponding or lead author, who is highlighted in the posting.

___________________________________________

Thursday, May 31, 2012

Editor’s Corner: Editorial in Reply to the Comments of Griffith Edwards




I HAVE HAD THE GOOD FORTUNE to serve on the Substance Use Disorders Work Groups for both the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV; American Psychiatric Association, 1994), and the DSM-5. Each committee met regularly for about 5 years, and in the decade of discussions I observed compromises that are likely to be inherent in any decision-making process. Through that experience, I formed some opinions about the
diagnostic manuals (these are my thoughts and not necessarily those of the Journal or of the DSM-5 Work Group), and this editorial reflects my view of things, not a golden “truth”with which everyone is likely to agree.

I write this editorial after reading Griffith Edwards’s (2012—p. 699 this issue) well-written and thought-provoking letter to the editor and the two responses from Drs. O’Brien (2012—p. 705 this issue) and Hasin (2012—p. 702 this issue). The following are some of my own reflections and biases on the important issues raised by Griffith. > > > > Read More
at