Psychiatric Nosology, The DSM, and International Criminal Justice

Abstract The American system of psychiatric diagnosis, embodied in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), and the modern project of International Criminal Justice may be regarded as twin progeny of the cataclysmic violence which marked the twentieth century. Both emerged as institutionalised, taxonomic responses to the trauma of World War II, each was reconfigured by the Cold War's ideological pressures and the specific moral crises of the Vietnam War, and these classificatory infrastructures converged in the 1990s with the establishment of ad hoc international tribunals. The article traces how these parallel systems of categorisation – one nosological, one juridical—developed distinct yet interrelated epistemic frameworks for addressing core international crimes. It focusses on the critical asymmetry that signifies their application: whilst psychiatric categories, particularly Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), have been expansively adopted by the international criminal courts and tribunals, to validate victim testimony, the same classificatory systems have been largely restricted from addressing perpetrator culpability. This selective adoption reveals the situated and contingent dimensions of classificatory infrastructures: indeed, categorisation stands not a neutral technical exercise but as a socio-political process, where the exigencies of legal accountability, epistemic rigour, and normative clarity are mobilised to negotiate and circumscribe the potentially disruptive psychological continuum between victim and perpetrator.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique
Published
2026-08-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-026-10552-4
Primary Topic
Torture, Ethics, and Law
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Psychiatric Nosology, The DSM, and International Criminal Justice

Karen McGregor Richmond
International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique
Torture, Ethics, and Law
article

Psychiatric Nosology, The DSM, and International Criminal Justice

Karen McGregor Richmond
article en

Abstract

Abstract The American system of psychiatric diagnosis, embodied in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), and the modern project of International Criminal Justice may be regarded as twin progeny of the cataclysmic violence which marked the twentieth century. Both emerged as institutionalised, taxonomic responses to the trauma of World War II, each was reconfigured by the Cold War's ideological pressures and the specific moral crises of the Vietnam War, and these classificatory infrastructures converged in the 1990s with the establishment of ad hoc international tribunals. The article traces how these parallel systems of categorisation – one nosological, one juridical—developed distinct yet interrelated epistemic frameworks for addressing core international crimes. It focusses on the critical asymmetry that signifies their application: whilst psychiatric categories, particularly Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), have been expansively adopted by the international criminal courts and tribunals, to validate victim testimony, the same classificatory systems have been largely restricted from addressing perpetrator culpability. This selective adoption reveals the situated and contingent dimensions of classificatory infrastructures: indeed, categorisation stands not a neutral technical exercise but as a socio-political process, where the exigencies of legal accountability, epistemic rigour, and normative clarity are mobilised to negotiate and circumscribe the potentially disruptive psychological continuum between victim and perpetrator.

International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique
University of Oxford (GB)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Torture, Ethics, and Law
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.