H. Steven Moffic, MD

Posted on February 3, I asked the question, CAUTION! Who Should Be the DSM5 Diagnostician? I suggested that we needed to pay as much attention to who would be designated as the diagnostician as on the revised diagnostic criteria.

It‘s not often that a writer gets such unexpected, and-I‘m quite sure-unintended credibility for an article. Whether by serendipity, synchronicity, or the collective unconscious, that seemed to occur with my January 6 Psychiatric Times blog on “Why Psychiatrists Should Go Green.”

“The proper use of these criteria requires specialized clinical training that provides both a body of knowledge and clinical skills.” How many of us psychiatrists recognize this statement? Or, is it like the fine print that we often gloss over in our everyday contracts and hope it doesn’t cause us trouble at some later time?

I don’t know how many psychiatrists paid much attention to the climate-change conference in Copenhagen last month, but I came away convinced they need our help. Here’s why.

This introduction article elucidates how the various contributions to this special report help make psychiatry such a rich and varied field.

How is cultural psychiatry defined? What is its history in the United States and how will it continue to influence mental health care in the future? What do mental health care professionals need to know to provide culturally sensitive care?

How has the emphasis on economics and mental health care affected the quality of care? Has it improved under managed care? Implementing prevention strategies and improved quality, although initially costly, may save money in the long term.

The advent of the new millennium has stimulated many discussions about what changes can-and should-occur in the world. For social psychiatry, there could not be a more fortuitous time to review and reaffirm our role in this country's health care.