Diagnostic systems and methods must respond to patients’ diversity in expressions of mental distress, social and cultural context and the meanings given to illness. Due to increasing migration and globalisation the challenge of considering diagnosis in the context of culture has become increasingly significant in Europe. And globalization has further led to changes in value systems and our awareness of patients with ethnic minority background.

Over recent decades, there has been an increasing development of psychiatric diagnosing with nosological categorisation combined with multi-axial schemas. Diagnosis, besides identifying a disorder and distinguishing one disorder from another disorder - differential diagnosis, has also an aim to include an overall understanding of the patient's situation.

We witness an upsurge in the attention paid to the cultural limitations to psychiatric diagnostic practice and treatment modalities. Guidelines for the psychiatric profession are in critical focus from a transcultural perspective. Some claim their universality independent of cultural context; others find cultural adaptation useful and necessary.

Do the diagnoses and clinical and ethical guidelines give meaning in the cultural setting? Are they compatible with the cultural values of the therapist and those of the patient and the family? Several sources claim the biomedical paradigm for being Western with insufficient consideration of the socio-political context.

The cultural formulation developed as part of DSM-IV and now DSM-5 is one model to support a systematic review of culture and context in psychiatric diagnosing.

The paper will discuss the advantages and shortcomings of current diagnostic categories and guidelines vis-à-vis the universe of traumatized refugees with other ethnic backgrounds.