I wonder if you espouse the philosophy of Denise Russell:... under whom I studied in 1997 at UNISYD... those glorious days of campus life. It is surreal, not only because you're smoking dope, but because it is a fairyland existence. We are once again kids, free and taken care of by mum, dad, the state or goodwill!
If in a sense you argue that physchiatrists alocate at will a label for a "condition" not (YET) existing in the DSM1V.
Denise Russell shows no reluctance to come to strong conclusions in her book Woman, Madness & Medicine. In the introduction she writes that "biological psychiatry has, on balance, produced more harm than good," (p. 1) and it is "a degenerating research programme and that it is time to look in completely new directions if we want to understand mental distress" (p. 2). Later, she says "there are no solid findings from genetics, neurophysiology, or computer studies which show that biological psychiatry is on the right track" (p. 95). So this Russell's work is firmly in the tradition of antipsychiatry. It is also strongly feminist. She argues that as far as psychiatry is concerned, the normal human being is male, so women are by nature abnormal. Of course, that's what she thinks is wrong with psychiatry.
'I my disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. Voltaire.