The old new theory of modern Russian psychiatry: a biopsychosocial approach (institutional discourse)

The article is discussed («Review of psychiatry and medical psychology named after V.M. Bekhterev». 2020; 2: 3-15), which examines the biopsychosocial model as the theoretical basis (scientific, clinical, preventive, therapeutic) of modern psychiatry, in particular, the biological (genetic) domain.The purpose of the discourse: from the standpoint of philosophy and methodology of science, to determine the place of the biological domain (biomedical research) of the biopsychosocial (biopsychosocial—spiritual) (BPS) approach (theory) in Russian psychiatry, in particular, from the standpoint of the subject of psychiatry and its main section-clinical psychiatry.Based on methodology and philosophy, and based on anthropological and holistic approaches, the biological domain of the BPS model, which is based on clinical psychiatry as a practice and, accordingly, theory, is discussed through the subject of psychiatry as a science. The significance and role of the subject of psychiatry (pathology, disorders, abnormalities of mental activity) in the ICD-10 and the components of the biopsychosocial (model) approach are discussed. There are differences in the domains of the model and the difficulties of clinical diagnosis (multi-axis, functional, multidimensional) and, accordingly, the study of the etiopathogenesis of mental disorders, the "bias" of diagnosis and therapy. The article deals with the neurological component of the biological domain and the "expansion" of neurologists into psychiatry, which leads to hidden antipsychiatry. The author emphasizes the independence, contiguity and two-paradigm nature of psychiatry as a science (with its own unity of subject and its own method of research—clinical and psychopathological). In addition to the interdisciplinarity of clinical neuroscience, it is proposed to be multidisciplinary (for the sections of psychiatry), but the future belongs to the transdisciplinary research methodology.

The biopsychosocial model – history, controversy and Engel

Objective: The biopsychosocial (BPS) model remains the predominant theoretical framework underpinning contemporary psychiatric training and practice. Like all models, it has its limitations and its critics. In light of recent censure, The purpose of this article was to (a) review key aspects of the history, development and contemporary utility of the BPS model and, (b) review key contributions of George Engel. Conclusion: An aetiological model for mental disorders that involves psychological, biological and sociocultural factors has existed since at least the 1940s. The term “biopsychosocial” was arguably first coined by Roy Grinker in 1952. Spurred on by his interest in systems theory, Engel expanded upon the model in 1977 and used it to hypothesise about the integration of mind and body. Despite its shortcomings, the BPS model remains relevant and useful.

The Biopsychosocial Model of Health and Disease

I respond to the 4 commentaries by Awais Aftab & Kristopher Nielsen (A&N), Hane Htut Maung (HHM), Diane O’Leary (DO’L) and Kathryn Tabb (KT) under 3 main headings: “What is the BPSM really?” & Why update it?; “Is our approach foundationally compromised?”, and finally, “Antagonists or fellow travellers?”.