This is the Cato Daily Podcast for Thursday, December 29th, 2011.

I'm Caleb Brown.

The definitions of mental illnesses are intensely political within psychiatry.

And since the government bestows benefits based on mental illness,

the newest revision of the DSM has a whole other political dimension.

Walter Olson, senior fellow at the Cato Institute, has a whole other political dimension.

Walter Olson, senior fellow at the Cato Institute, comments.

American Psychiatric Association is doing a huge revision of its so-called Bible of mental diagnosis, the diagnostic and statistical manual,

which has been known as DSM-4 and it's going to be known as DSM-5 when they're done with the revision.

And the definitions of mental disorders are going

to be expanded so that it will be easier to diagnose a mental disorder with fewer symptoms so that new disorders like

Internet Addiction Syndrome which have not been recognized will emerge as, and it is with medical significance, and

much more.

And this is a political document within the profession, just because certain things used to be

there that aren't anymore.

It is a constant battleground and a tug of war has gone on for many decades.

Things have been taken out such as homosexuality.

Things have been controversial in both directions and it is important

as practical level in all sorts of decisions about what will be paid for,

and as we will see in the regulatory domain of who can sue who is entitled to what kind of benefits in the workplace.

All right, so we're talking about disabilities then.

We're talking about disabilities and that plays out legally in several different ways.

...