The American Psychiatric Association has released the proposals for the DSM V revisions for review and comment today.
There has been considerable concern voiced within the transgender community around both who has been involved in the Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders working groups and some of the pet theories that some of those people may have tried to insert into the DSM V.
I'm very pleased to note that those fears seem to have been allayed in the committee process. Nowhere in there did I find the language of 'Autogynephilia', and in the revisions proposed for Gender Identity Disorder - in fact in this paper by Peggy Cohen-Kettenis, it seems fairly clear why the language of Autogynephilia wasn't adopted.
Overall, I like the proposed changes. They head in the direction of supporting the notion of gender as a spectrum rather than hard categories. Some of Kelly Winters' advocacy for "an exit clause" has also been adopted. Also, a clearer approach to dealing with cases where Gender Identity issues intersect with Intersex conditions has been added.
The term 'Gender Identity Disorder' is to be replaced with 'Gender Incongruity' - an interesting change that addresses the stigmatization criticism that has been levelled at the old terminology.
302.6 Gender Identity Disorder in Children
302.85 Gender Identity Disorder in Adolescents or Adults
302.6 Gender Identity Disorder Not Otherwise Specified
*Note: The really interesting discussions are in the Rationale tabs, which discusses the implications of the changes proposed, as well as what is still under discussion.
**Note: There is still an ongoing discussion as to whether the Gender Incongruity section should remain in the same section of the DSM as the various sexual paraphilias.
Given much of the uproar in the transgender community over the involvement of Blanchard and Zucker in particular on the overarching committee, I think that a collective sigh of relief is in order. It appears that the "pet theories" that both men are associated with that so many find deeply offensive have not been railroaded into place, and in fact the collective wisdom of all the participants has prevailed.