I only quote what I comment on:
I agree - and thanks for many excellent posts.
As to the DSM-V submission: I agree mostly with the possibility
I do think it is entirely up to him and Margaret Williams, and personally I have no issue with their treatment of Michael Sharpe, who is a very slippery customer who is NOT doing real science, but purists as regards perfectly straight quotation, such as Esther12, have something of a point.
As I said, I don't mind Hooper & Williiams's take, especially because I feel quite sure Sharpe is or at least was playing a very tricky, very dishonest game, while properly showing Sharpe's deviousness would have taken far too much space in their excellent text, and I really do think Sharpe dreamt up the phrase "undeserving sick", including a devious partially false attribution to GBS, in order to arrive subtextually and insinuatively at "undeserving sick" = "neurasthenics".
Anyway... I would like to see "psychosomatic illness" discussed on this forum, that has a lot of specialists on it, psychologists and medical doctors included, and many who have had the charge levelled at them.
For me, it is hogwash, but then I am a scientific realist who believes he has no soul, or at least not one which exists besides and apart from processes in the brain, nor one which is fit for special psychiatric or psychological treatment.
And I do know most psychotherapy and psychiatry is pseudo-science, that only helps the therapists. (There are exceptions, but this is mostly due to the humanity and honesty of the therapists, and not to the soundness or well-foundedness of their therapeutical theories.)