Article: The rise and fall of the biopsychosocial model, 2009, Ghaemi

[Andy]

Abstract
The biopsychosocial model is the conceptual status quo of contemporary psychiatry. Although it has played an important role in combatting psychiatric dogmatism, it has devolved into mere eclecticism. Other non-reductionistic approaches to medicine and psychiatry such as William Osler's medical humanism or Karl Jaspers' method-based psychiatry should be reconsidered.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/jour.../A31DAA3BED6569F6080A1DF2C1D15A64/core-reader

 

[ME/CFS Skeptic]

There's also a book by Nassir Ghaemi: The Rise and Fall of the Biopsychosocial Model: Reconciling Art and Science in Psychiatry.

 

[rvallee]

https://www.cambridge.org/core/jour.../A31DAA3BED6569F6080A1DF2C1D15A64/core-reader

The dogma is dead. Long live the dogma!

Or

Meet the new dogma, (mostly) same as the old dogma

 

[Inara]

This is a highly interesting article for me. It helped me a lot with understanding the BPS ideology better. This explained the chameleon-like behavior observed in BPS proponents:

Beyond the formal definition given above, there is another ultimate, rarely explicit rationale for the biopsychosocial model: eclecticism. Grinker forthrightly argued for a ‘struggle for eclecticism’ 4 as opposed to psychoanalytic dogmatism. Yet where Grinker was sober and limited in his goals, Engel was expansive. Grinker identified the key: biopsychosocial advocates really seek eclectic freedom, the ability to ‘individualise treatment to the patient’, which has come to mean, in practice, being allowed to do whatever one wants to do.