` -

Previous IndexNL Next

Jan 14, 2012                   

Good news: "DSM-5-censorship fails"

"Knowledge without conscience is the ruination of the soul."
-- Rabelais

As before, I am still not feeling well, what with ME/CFS, but it's a bit better again than the last few days, and the first thing to do is to reproduce some good news from the Dx Revision Watch site by Suzy Chapman, that I last mentioned in Nederlog ten days ago:

    - Is the American Psychiatric Association a terrorist organization?

The good news is that Ms Chapman's site was not to be repressed by the American Psychiatric Association, though it did change its name. Here is how she tells the tale in tandem with Allen Frances MD, also on Psychology Today, where dr Frances writes a regular column on the DSM-5, that he - the chief-editor of the DSM-IV and a professor emeritus of psychiatry of Duke University: Not someone whose opinions on the subject are to be brushed off lightly - has large reservations about and serious objections to.

I quote, between the two horizontal lines, and there is an endnote by me:

From Suzy Chapman for

Dx Revision Watch

12 January 2012

DSM 5 Censorship Fails: Support From Professionals and Patients Saves Free Speech: Allen Frances

Psychology Today

DSM5 in Distress
The DSM’s impact on mental health practice and research.
by Allen Frances, M.D. (Chair, DSM-IV Task Force and currently professor emeritus at Duke.)

Allen Frances, M.D. |  January 12, 2012

DSM-5-censorship fails

Support From Professionals and Patients Saves Free Speech 

Last week I described the plight of Suzy Chapman, a well respected UK patient advocate forced to change the domain name of her website by the heavy handed tactics of the publishing arm of the American Psychiatric Association. The spurious legal excuse was commercial protection of the 'DSM 5' trademark; the probable intent was to stifle one of the internet's best sources of DSM and ICD information. This bullying could not have come at a worse time - just as final decisions are being made on highly controversial DSM 5 proposals and with the third and final draft due for release this spring. This is precisely when a ragged and reckless DSM 5 can most benefit from the widest and most open discussion.

Though APA's trademark claims were patently absurd, Ms Chapman did not have the necessary resources for a protracted fight against a well staffed legal department. Visits plummeted drastically to her new web address (reaching a nadir of just one hit per day) and the site faced months of slow recovery. But the good news is that APA's clumsy attempt at censorship has backfired, free speech will prevail, and the site is now more popular than ever.

Suzy Chapman writes:

"I want to thank the many psychiatrists, allied mental health professionals, and science writers who have spoken out in opposition to what they see as arrogant censorship on the part of the American Psychiatric Association. Their outpouring of concern has generated considerable interest on websites, blogs and social media platforms. This has increased the traffic on my site by many hundreds of visitors per day. The support of professionals and patient groups illustrates the power of the internet to resist suppression of patient advocacy and to promote free speech."

"The purpose of my site is to raise public and stakeholder awareness of the forthcoming revisions of both DSM-5 and ICD-11. I endeavor to provide timely and accurate information about DSM-5, including: internet commentaries on proposals; flag ups of journal papers and editorials; news releases and other media statements; and updates on changes to the DSM-5 timeline. I also cover progress on ICD-11, including activities of the Revision Steering Group; documents, presentations and videos; and updates on the ICD-11 timeline. I report on developments with the forthcoming US ICD-10-CM and proceedings of a US federal Advisory Committee to HHS in relation to coding issues. Finally, I follow the advocacy campaigns and initiatives relating to DSM and ICD classificatory issues. My objective is to help stakeholders understand the issues so that they may provide the most useful feedback to the revision process."

"Despite all the controversies, despite the calls for independent review, despite all the delays and limitations of its field trials, DSM-5 hurtles forward towards publication in May 2013. During this final, decisive year of DSM 5 decision making, I shall continue to publish information, updates and commentaries to promote the widest possible dialogue around the drafting of this most important publication. My new site, 'Dx Revision Watch - Monitoring the development of DSM-5, ICD-11, ICD-10-CM' can be found at:

"This experience has taught me that the APA trademark claims were not only misguided, but probably legally indefensible. 'Nominative fair use' is permitted those who are publishing criticism within texts if use of the trademark is relevant to the subject of discussion or necessary to identify the product, service, or company. Courts have found that non-misleading use of trademarks in the domain names of critical websites (like walmartsucks.com) is to be considered 'fair use' by non-commercial users - so long as there is no intent to misrepresent or confuse visitors to the site and when it is clear that the site owner is not claiming endorsement by, or affiliation to, the holder of the mark."

"Everything I have read suggests that my clearly non-commercial use of my previous subdomain name (dsm5watch.wordpress.com) - with its prominent disclaimer and no intent to mislead - falls well within the concept of 'fair use'. This then raises the obvious question - what grounds did APA have for serving me with demands and threats of possible legal action? Several people have independently sent me materials on 'SLAPP' lawsuits (strategic lawsuit against public participation). These are threats of legal action intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense - so that they will abandon their criticism or opposition."

"If you are interested in learning more about 'SLAPP' lawsuits, there is a good summary at

"The Electronic Frontier Foundation is also a very useful resource for legal advice on trademark law for blog and website owners. See

"The surprisingly spirited and unanimous internet reaction provoked by the APA's actions will probably discourage it from future pursuit of other 'fair use' site owners. I certainly hope so. But if other site owners are issued inappropriate 'cease and desist' claims, I do hope they have the resources to seek legal advice before complying." 

"I am very grateful for all the support received in the past week and the many emails thanking me for the work I do. It is gratifying to hear that not only do patients, caregivers and patient organizations rely on my carefully researched and presented content, but that so many professionals are also following my site and find it useful. This experience has been stressful, but I can now say confidently that APA's actions have definitely backfired - the many hundreds of additional viewers discovering the site each day will expand its audience and its usefulness."

All of us owe great thanks to Ms Chapman and to the internet community whose ringing endorsement has allowed her not only to maintain, but also to enlarge, her readership. Ms Chapman will continue to provide the field with the most current and most accurate reporting on DSM 5 during its endgame. I strongly recommend her website as the best clearinghouse for information on DSM 5.

I join Ms Chapman in hoping that this embarrassing episode will discourage APA from all future efforts at abusive censorship - whether they are related to trademark, copyright, or confidentiality agreements. The field must remain vigilant in its efforts to contain APA commercialism and persistent in trying to penetrate APA's secrecy and inbred decision making. APA must finally come to realize that DSM 5 is an open public trust, not a private business enterprise.


Related material:

DSM 5 A Public Trust Or An APA Cash Cow?  Commercialism And Censorship Trump Concern For Quality, Allen Frances, M.D., Psychology Today, January 03, 2012:


Further media coverage of the "APA cease and desist v DSM-5 Watch website" issue collated here: http://wp.me/pKrrB-1Bi

Article on "cease and desist" issue: Pity the poor American Psychiatric Association, Parts 1 and 2 by author, Gary Greenberg, here:


Legal information and resources for bloggers and site owners:

1] Wipedia article: Cease and desist

2] Wipedia article: Strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP)

3] Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)

EFF Bloggers’ Rights

EFF Legal Guide for Bloggers

4] Chilling Effects

5] "U.S. Trademark Law, Rules of Practice & Federal Statutes", U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, November 2011

Suzy Chapman



So... that's really good news for quite a few reasons, mostly mentioned above by Suzy Chapman or Allen Frances.

Also, I was pleased to see that quite a few people, indeed from different walks of life, different professions and different motivations spoke up in support of Suzy Chapman and her site. And it clearly did not do well for the reputation of the American Psychiatric Association - and deservedly so.

Indeed, I noticed today an interesting fact, that may be related to the DSM-5 and its many awful unscientific immoral qualities; to the ongoing petition against it by psychologists, social workers and mental health workers (**); to dr. Frances' articles in Psychology Today about it; or to other reasons - if it is not a typo, which seems less likely.

Here the fact is, laid out in two graphics grabbed from the DSM-5 site maintained by the APA:

Last year, in fact a little over half a year ago, I mentioned and quoted by a screengrab the following claim, here represented by that same item from my submission to the A trics A (*):

Status June 2011:

I wrote then that this is a

quote from a humble honest professional organization, no member of which ever heard the terms "megalomania" or "oxymoron", as in "38,000 leaders"

because it does sound to me as inane and stupid grandstanding and grandiloquence.

Well... the APA has renewed its DSM-5 site I found today, and here is what I found and screengrabbed today:

Status January 2012:

I kid you not: 2,000 "physician leaders in mental healthless, in a little over half a year! Is there a lethal epidemy among their members, perhaps?

As it happens, I don't know the explanation. But I have meanwhile read at least one psychiatrist who spoke of ending his membership, indeed because of the DSM-5, and I can well understand why: I do believe there are sincere psychiatrists who mean well, and if I were such a one I would feel most uncomfortable, both with the DSM-5 and with the antics of the leadership of those 38,000 "36,000 physician leaders in mental health" of the APA, including the treatment - rude, impolite, hardly rational - meeted out to some of their well-known critics like Allen Frances and Gary Greenberg.

(*) There are several APAs, and what makes it more confusing is that there are both the American Psychiatric Association and the American Psychological Association. Being myself blessed with an - excellent - M.A. in the science of psychology, I tend to call the former the A trics A and the latter the A psy A. (Again oddly, given all of the text above: The A psy A = apa.org while the A trics A = psych.org: The A psy A better watch out for the legal bullies and menaces of the A trics A as regards the hallowed "apa" term!)

(**) I quote again from Dx Revision Watch:

An Open Letter and Petition sponsored by the Society for Humanistic Psychology (Division 32 of the American Psychological Association), in alliance with several other American Psychological Association Divisions, attracted nearly 7000 signatures in its first three weeks. Since launching the petition, on October 22, over 10,300 mental health and allied professionals have signed up with over 40 organizations publicly endorsing the Open Letter.

You can view the Open Letter and iPetition here.

Corrections, if any are necessary, have to be made later.


As to ME/CFS (that I prefer to call ME):
1.  Anthony Komaroff Ten discoveries about the biology of CFS (pdf)
3.  Hillary Johnson The Why
4.  Consensus of M.D.s Canadian Consensus Government Report on ME (pdf)
5.  Eleanor Stein Clinical Guidelines for Psychiatrists (pdf)
6.  William Clifford The Ethics of Belief
7.  Paul Lutus

Is Psychology a Science?

8.  Malcolm Hooper Magical Medicine (pdf)
 Maarten Maartensz
ME in Amsterdam - surviving in Amsterdam with ME (Dutch)
 Maarten Maartensz Myalgic Encephalomyelitis

Short descriptions of the above:                

1. Ten reasons why ME/CFS is a real disease by a professor of medicine of Harvard.
2. Long essay by a professor emeritus of medical chemistry about maltreatment of ME.
3. Explanation of what's happening around ME by an investigative journalist.
4. Report to Canadian Government on ME, by many medical experts.
5. Advice to psychiatrist by a psychiatrist who understands ME is an organic disease
6. English mathematical genius on one's responsibilities in the matter of one's beliefs:

7. A space- and computer-scientist takes a look at psychology.
8. Malcolm Hooper puts things together status 2010.
9. I tell my story of surviving (so far) in Amsterdam/ with ME.
10. The directory on my site about ME.

See also: ME -Documentation and ME - Resources
The last has many files, all on my site to keep them accessible.

        home - index - summaries - top - mail