The medical model of mental illness is flawed

The medical model holds that mental illness is a psychiatric disease with a physical (e.g., neurological, anatomical) explanations that can be addressed with medical treatment.(1) I object to this model mainly holding that there is currently not empirical evidence to back up the claims that psychiatric conditions are biological in nature. Without evidence of disease the administration of psychiatric drugs with dangerous side affects is suspect, especially when it is admitted that the mechanism of action for such drugs is unknown. 1) Lack of diagnostic tests PET scans and such items are used in research to try to find brain differences between people who suffer from mental upset and those who don't. Also, other research methodologies are used but don't yield consistent results. A good psychiatrist will do physical tests to rule out physical illnesses but these test cannot confirm a brain disease or physical presence of mental illness however this is seemingly rarely the case. Diagnosis of mental illness is based on subjective checklists or behaviors and attitudes as listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders(DSM). The question that needs an answer is how can one diagnose biological disease based on checklists and questions rather than on actual testing? This leaves psychiatry outside of traditional medicine. 2) Psychiatry has no cures Although conceded as a weaker argument as many diseases don't have cures, it is of note that psychiatry is unable to cure any mental illness as note by Dr. Rex Cowdry: "We do not know the causes [of any mental illness]. We don"t have the methods of "curing" these illnesses yet." Dr. Rex Cowdry, psychiatrist and director of National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), 1995(2) 3) Chemical Imbalance Hypothesis is not accepted by scientists The"chemical imbalance" hypothesis still persists because no alternative biological explanation has taken root. Johan A Den Boer states the problem like this: "While the hypothesis has been shown to be simplistic and lacking, there is sufficient evidence to consider it as a useful heuristic in the aiding of our understanding of brain chemistry and explaining pharmacotherapy" (3) In other words, it is an explanation that can be given for treatment of patients with drugs but it does not prove a disease process. So what is the alternative? If diagnosis is flawed, and there is no proof of biological disease process what should we do? Mental and emotional upset is very real as I have previously stated there is no denying it. Should we give drugs without solid science, the answer to that should be no. Can we treat people without drugs but with Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, or Dialectical Behavior Therapy, spiritual counseling and the like? Of course! Those methods have been empirically proven and yield results. Hoffmann et al. give one such case of efficacy of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov... (4) In summary, the medical model cannot diagnose disease process in mental illness, cannot identify one(although ideas exist about it) and it cannot cure any of its illnesses. Therefore, the medical model is flawed and should be dispensed with in favor of psychological and/or spiritual treatments that are valid and sound. References: (1) http://www.szasz.com... Ron Leifer, M.D. 2001 (2) http://www.cchr.org... (3) Johan A Den Boer European Neurological Review, 2006;6(1):87-92 (4) Stefan G. Hofmann et. al The Efficacy of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy: A Review of Meta-analyses Cognitive Therapy and Research 2012 Oct 1; 36(5): 427"440.