Psychiatrists, following a recent conversation I'm curious, do you genuinely believe that your assessment of a patient is ever truly "objective"? It seems to me that by "objective" you really mean "highly subjective opinion that comes from someone other than the patient"? /1

Surely there's no such thing as true objectivity in psychiatry assessments? Ax will be influenced (even subtlety) by your own subjective experiences (clinical and non-clinical), cultural norms, biases, etc. So why the use of (and belief in the validity of) the term "o/e"?
/2

Psychiatrist I spoke to today was absolutely adamant that psychiatry assessments aren't a subjective science and didn't seem to have any insight into the inherent subjectivity involved in the "objective examination" process. Is this really a commonly held view? /3

As a patient, and as a former psychology trainee who frequently undertook assessments, it's utterly bizarre to me that a clinician would believe ANY mental health assessment is truly objective. I can't even think how one could substantiate the argument of objectivity here?
/4

I also think failing to recognise the subjective forces at play behind the (in my view) unfortunately named "objective examination" indicates a worrying lack of awareness into patient/clinician power dynamics.

Too harsh? Or am I thinking too much with my psychology hat on? /5

I can understand the use of "o/e" in psychiatry as arising from usage as shorthand in general medicine but I question its validity in this context. Psychiatrists, is there something I'm missing here? Why do some of you believe psychiatry assessments are objective? /6

I feel the makings of a @dear_gp post coming on...

Dear GP,

Thank you for your referral of this young professional. Objective examination revealed beliefs of a fixed nature seemingly with no basis in reality and which greatly restrict his communicative ability...