Final answer:
Major criticism of the DSM includes pathologizing normal behaviors, aligning with pharmaceutical interests, and failing to account for complex individual experiences.
Step-by-step explanation:
One major criticism of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual on Mental Disorders (DSM), driving scholars to consider alternatives such as the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC), is that it can pathologize normal human behaviors and experiences. This criticism is supported by the notion that the DSM has, at times, been observed as aligning with pharmaceutical interests, categorizing conditions like fatigue and insomnia in ways that may benefit drug companies financially.
Additionally, the DSM's categorical nature has been controversial. While it provides a common language for diagnosing mental disorders, it may fail to capture the complexity of individual experiences or adhere to advances in neuroscience and genetics. This is why the RDoC approach offers a different framework that focuses on dimensions of functioning across multiple levels of analysis, from genetics to behavior, potentially improving diagnosis and treatment.
Meanwhile, the historical evolution of personality disorder classification within the DSM serves as an example of this ongoing debate and the difficulty in achieving consensus among various stakeholders in the mental health field. Such evolution underscores the importance of flexibility and research-based approaches to the diagnosis and treatment of mental health conditions.