New here? Get 15% off your first order.See how it works

Nursing questions

DQ 2 :The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) provides diagnostic criteria for substance-related diagnoses, What problems can arise if a counselor relies solely on this criterion for diagnostic purposes?

The load-bearing word is solely. The prompt is not asking whether the DSM is valid, it is asking what a counsellor misses by using it alone, and the answer has to be evidence-supported as the brief demands.

Editorial process

Last reviewed · August 22, 2026

01

The word doing the work in this prompt is 'solely'

Notice what the prompt does not ask. It does not ask whether the DSM criteria are valid, and a post that attacks them wholesale will read as a student who has not understood why they exist. The load-bearing word is solely. Criteria give you reliability, a shared vocabulary with other clinicians and payers, and a threshold that can be applied consistently across counsellors. What they cannot do is stand in for the rest of an assessment. Open by granting the first point in a sentence, because doing so makes the criticism that follows land as clinical judgement rather than as scepticism about diagnosis. It also matters that the DSM itself does not claim to be a complete assessment: it supplies criteria for a diagnosis, and a diagnosis is one component of an evaluation that also has to establish severity, function, risk and readiness. Framed that way, the question is about what a counsellor adds to the manual.

Then be specific about what is lost. Criteria are categorical while the underlying problem is dimensional, so a client meeting one criterion and a client meeting five may both be counted as having a disorder while needing very different care. Criteria say nothing about function, which is what a treatment plan is actually built on. They are silent about readiness to change, so two identically diagnosed clients can need entirely different interventions. They depend on accurate self-report, which is compromised by shame, by mandated referral and by intoxication at the time of assessment. They can behave differently across cultures, where a symptom's meaning and reporting norms vary. And they exclude the sources that would correct them: collateral history, toxicology, medical evaluation for withdrawal risk, and screening for co-occurring mental disorders that criteria for a substance disorder cannot detect. Close by saying what a full assessment adds, since the prompt implies a better alternative and never names it.

Likely learning objectives

  • Explain what diagnostic criteria contribute before criticising their limits.
  • Distinguish categorical criteria from dimensional severity and functional impairment.
  • Identify the assessment sources criteria cannot replace.
  • Support a critique of criterion-based diagnosis with published evidence.

Assignment instructions

Read the full question

Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.

PCN 501 Grand Canyon Week 3 Discussion 2 DQ 2 :The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) provides diagnostic criteria for substance-related diagnoses, What problems can arise if a counselor relies solely on this criterion for diagnostic purposes? The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) provides diagnostic criteria for substance-related diagnoses. What problems can arise if a counselor relies solely on this criterion for diagnostic purposes? Support your answer with evidence PCN 501 Grand Canyon Week 3 Discussion 2

Course-wide instructions that accompany this question

ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS Discussion Questions (DQ) Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, include a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words. Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source. One or two sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words. I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses. Weekly Participation Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately. In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies. Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work). Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week. APA Format and Writing Quality Familiarize yourself with APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required). Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation. I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition. Use of Direct Quotes I discourage overutilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Masters’ level and deduct points accordingly. As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an understanding of the content or critical analysis of the content. It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source. LopesWrite Policy For assignments that need to be submitted to LopesWrite, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me. Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes. Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own? Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score. Late Policy The university’s policy on late assignments is 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies. Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances. If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect. I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension. As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading. Communication Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me: Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class. Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours. Grading Rubric Guidelines Performance Category 10 9 8 4 0 Scholarliness Demonstrates achievement of scholarly inquiry for professional and academic decisions. Provides relevant evidence of scholarly inquiry clearly stating how the evidence informed or changed professional or academic decisions Evaluates literature resources to develop a comprehensive analysis or synthesis. Uses valid, relevant, and reliable outside sources to contribute to the threaded discussion Provides relevant evidence of scholarly inquiry but does not clearly state how the evidence informed or changed professional or academic decisions. Evaluates information from source(s) to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis. Uses some valid, relevant, reliable outside sources to contribute to the threaded discussion. Discusses using scholarly inquiry but does not state how scholarly inquiry informed or changed professional or academic decisions. Information is taken from source(s) with some interpretation/evaluation, but not enough to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis. Little valid, relevant, or reliable outside sources are used to contribute to the threaded discussion. Demonstrates little or no understanding of the topic. Discusses using scholarly inquiry but does not state how scholarly inquiry informed or changed professional or academic decisions. Information is taken from source(s) without any interpretation/evaluation. The posting uses information that is not valid, relevant, or reliable No evidence of the use of scholarly inquiry to inform or change professional or academic decisions. Information is not valid, relevant, or reliable Performance Category 10 9 8 4 0 Application of Course Knowledge – Demonstrate the ability to analyze, synthesize, and/or apply principles and concepts learned in the course lesson and outside readings and relate them to real-life professional situations Posts make direct reference to concepts discussed in the lesson or drawn from relevant outside sources; Applies concepts to personal experience in the professional setting and or relevant application to real life. Posts make direct reference to concepts discussed in the lesson or drawn from relevant outside sources. Applies concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life Interactions with classmates are relevant to the discussion topic but do not make direct reference to lesson content Posts are generally on topic but do not build knowledge by incorporating concepts and principles from the lesson. Does not attempt to apply lesson concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life Does not demonstrate a solid understanding of the principles and concepts presented in the lesson Posts do not adequately address the question posed either by the discussion prompt or the instructor’s launch post. Posts are superficial and do not reflect an understanding of the lesson content Does not attempt to apply lesson concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life Posts are not related to the topics provided by the discussion prompt or by the instructor; attempts by the instructor to redirect the student are ignored No discussion of lesson concepts to personal experience in the professional setting and or relevant application to real life Performance Category 5 4 3 2 0 Interactive Dialogue Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts a minimum of two times in each graded thread, on separate days. (5 points possible per graded thread) Exceeds minimum post requirements Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts three or more times in each graded thread, over three separate days. Replies to a post posed by faculty and to a peer Summarizes what was learned from the lesson, readings, and other student posts for the week. Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts a minimum of two times in each graded thread, on separate days Replies to a question posed by a peer Summarizes what was learned from the lesson, readings, and other student posts for the week. Meets expectations of 2 posts on 2 different days. The main post is not made by the Wednesday deadline Does not reply to a question posed by a peer or faculty Has only one post for the week Discussion posts contain few, if any, new ideas or applications; often are a rehashing or summary of other students’ comments Does not post to the thread No connections are made to the topic Minus 1 Point Minus 2 Point Minus 3 Point Minus 4 Point Minus 5 Point Grammar, Syntax, APA Note: if there are only a few errors in these criteria, please note this for the student in as an area for improvement. If the student does not make the needed corrections in upcoming weeks, then points should be deducted. Points deducted for improper grammar, syntax and APA style of writing. The source of information is the APA Manual 6th Edition 2-3 errors in APA format. Written responses have 2-3 grammatical, spelling, and punctuation errors. Writing style is generally clear, focused, and facilitates communication. 4-5 errors in APA format. Writing responses have 4-5 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors. Writing style is somewhat focused. 6-7 errors in APA format. Writing responses have 6-7 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors. Writing style is slightly focused making discussion difficult to understand. 8-10 errors in APA format. Writing responses have 8-10 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors. Writing style is not focused, making discussion difficult to understand. Post contains greater than 10 errors in APA format. Written responses have more than 10 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors. Writing style does not facilitate communication. The student continues to make repeated mistakes in any of the above areas after written correction by the instructor 0 points lost -5 points lost Total Participation Requirements per discussion thread The student answers the threaded discussion question or topic on one day and posts a second response on another day. The student does not meet the minimum requirement of two postings on two different days Early Participation Requirement per discussion thread The student must provide a substantive answer to the graded discussion question(s) or topic(s), posted by the course instructor (not a response to a peer), by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT of each week. The student does not meet the requirement of a substantive response to the stated question or topic by Wednesday at 11:59 pm MT.

02

Turn the brief into deliverables

  1. 01An acknowledgement of what standardised criteria contribute.
  2. 02The categorical versus dimensional problem, stated concretely.
  3. 03The gap between meeting criteria and describing function.
  4. 04Self-report and cultural limitations with reasons.
  5. 05The additional assessment sources a full evaluation uses.
  6. 06Evidence cited, as the prompt explicitly requires.
03

What criteria give you, and what they leave out

01

What criteria are for

State the reliability and communication functions criteria serve.

What the assessor is likely looking for

Reliability named as the benefit being traded against.

02

Categorical thresholds, dimensional problems

Show two clients on the same side of a threshold needing different care.

What the assessor is likely looking for

A worked contrast rather than an abstract statement.

03

Function and readiness are missing

Explain what a treatment plan needs that criteria do not supply.

What the assessor is likely looking for

Readiness to change named explicitly.

04

Self-report and culture

Give the conditions under which criterion-based data are distorted.

What the assessor is likely looking for

Mandated referral or intoxication named as a specific distortion.

05

What a full assessment adds

Name collateral history, toxicology, medical review and comorbidity screening.

What the assessor is likely looking for

A source that would change the diagnosis, not merely enrich it.

04

Where the limits of criterion-based diagnosis are documented

Recommended databases

  • NCBI Bookshelf
  • NIDA
  • SAMHSA publications
  • GCU Library

Search sequence

  1. 1.Read the diagnostic criteria source before criticising it, so the critique is accurate.
  2. 2.Find evidence on self-report validity in substance use assessment.
  3. 3.Look up co-occurring disorder screening recommendations.
  4. 4.Search for literature on cultural variation in symptom reporting.
05

Reference shortlist

These are authoritative starting points, not a ready-made bibliography. A qualified reviewer must confirm that each source fits the assignment and supports the claim beside which it is cited.

Substance Use Disorder

StatPearls, NCBI Bookshelf · 2023

Review before citing

The diagnostic criteria and severity specifiers, for the categorical-dimensional point.

Motivational Interviewing

StatPearls, NCBI Bookshelf · 2024

Review before citing

Motivational interviewing, for readiness to change as an assessment dimension.

06

Before you post to the Week 3 forum

Common mistakes

  • Arguing that the DSM is invalid rather than that it is insufficient alone.
  • Listing limitations without saying what a fuller assessment would add.
  • Ignoring readiness to change, which criteria are entirely silent about.
  • Treating cultural variation as a general caution rather than a specific effect on reporting.
  • Omitting evidence, which the brief asks for by name.

Submission checklist

  • Have you granted what criteria do well before criticising them?
  • Is the categorical-dimensional problem illustrated with an example?
  • Have you named at least three sources criteria cannot replace?
  • Is readiness to change addressed?
  • Is every claim supported by a citation?

Use this guide to plan and review your own work. Follow your institution's rules and read Brinevia's academic-integrity policy.

Written by

Maren Caldwell

MSN, RN, CNE

Medical-surgical nursing, pharmacology and NCLEX preparation

Maren is a registered nurse with over 15 years of clinical and educational experience in medical-surgical nursing. She writes on NCLEX preparation, patient care fundamentals, pharmacology and evidence-based practice.

Reviewed by

Dr. Tessa Redmond

DNP, RN, CNE

Evidence-based practice and clinical education

Tessa is a doctorally-prepared nurse educator. She reviews Brinevia content for clinical accuracy and alignment with current evidence-based guidelines.

Want feedback on your plan before you draft?

Get help interpreting the brief, checking your evidence strategy, and strengthening your outline while keeping the work your own.

Get assignment guidance
Start your order