Shawn Maxam gives a little advice on how to discuss individuals living with mental illness with positive and affirming language.
For too long we have swept the problems of mental illness under the carpet… and hoped that they would go away.
-Richard J. Codey
Uh so there’s an interesting article from the NY Times magazine that shed some light on what it is like as a family member to see a loved one succumb to the worst aspects of having a mental illness. It is honest, raw and heartfelt. The title of the article is also highly offensive. Now I assume that the copy editor purposely titled the article in a provocative manner so people would actually read the damn thing. Oh yeah the name of the article is “When My Crazy Father Actually Lost His Mind”.
So to be brief when you are discussing individuals who have a mental illness who aren’t related to you the best ways to refer to members of the community is the following:
- Individuals living with a mental illness
- People who have a mental illness
- Individuals/people who have brain-based disorders
- Individuals/people who have a psychiatric disorder
- Individuals/people living with a mental health diagnosis
Words like crazy, insane, psycho, lunatic and so on are inappropriate. Phrases like “the mentally ill” are not very affirming either. It is also not cool to call a person a schizophrenic or a bipolar person. People have the disease but they aren’t the disease. Now of course there are individuals who do not mind the aforementioned labels which is fine. I am just discussing the best way to engage the mental health community as a whole. Just as you would say a person living with a diagnosis of HIV or AIDS and not a AIDS person – the same care should be taken with people, such as myself, who have a mental illness diagnosis.
Thank you for listening.
Please share this with friends, enemies and temporary allies alike.
Thanks for reading, sharing and commenting!
R.I.P. SKH
Flickr image via Vilseskogen
About S. Maxam
Shawn, A very good article with some excellent advice. But I have to question your use of the term “mental health community” when addressing an issue like this. People like psychiatrists, psychiatric nurses, psychiatric ward techs, counselors, teachers of the emotionally disturbed, and researchers are in the “mental health profession”, but I don’t see there being a “mental health” community any more than there is a cancer community, or shingles community, or paraplegic community. As you say yourself in the article, “People have the disease but they aren’t the disease.” People with these issues need to be addressed as individuals, with compassion and not labels. Also, if you look at advocacy groups for those living with a mental illness like NAMI, the people running those organizations are not diagnosed themselves, but rather fall into the “mental health profession” category. If I were you, I would proudly claim to be a member of the Brooklyn community.
J P you are totally correct. I actually volunteer at a local NAMI so your example is appropo. Thanks for adding such wonderful insight with your comment.
Cheers.
Thanks for the informative article. I’m so used to people referring to those of us with mental illness as “crazy”, “looney-tunes”, “nuts”, etc, I didn’t even notice the demeaning title of the NYT article.
You are welcome Thomas. I think the story from the NY Times is important because it allows us to have a public conversation it just becomes problematic like you said when the title is demeaning which can distract from great content.
Shawn, I’m wondering if these terms are also appropriate for people who haven’t been officially diagnosed (because they don’t want to receive treatment) but are struggling with various issues related to their mental health?
I know a couple of people who fit this description. It can be difficult to politely but accurately explain certain disruptive behaviours* to “outsiders” who haven’t known them very long since there’s no official diagnosis.
*for lack of a better term. I have no idea how to phrase this better!
Totally Lydia I agree and see your point. I think you are spot-on about the sensitivity of phrasing but even by being aware makes us more empathic.
The title of the article isn’t demeaning, it’s a self aware play on words. Somehow naming the article “When my strange father was diagnosed with a mental illness” seems to lack the same pop.
I agree that it doesn’t pop. Hopefully one day we can tell human stories without having to use sensational titles to educate our society.
Thanks for the link to this.
I actually have a big problem with anyone who thinks that using that kind of description as attention grabber is a good thing. It actually does a lot more harm than good. Rather than being normalised (which is what is desperately needed) it throws up mental health as a spectacle. Crudely put, people see the title and are looking to be entertained.
jp, thanks for your words of wisdom and your contribution to the “mentally impaired” category……i myself have been a mental health worker for almost 3 years, and an employee in the geriatric field before that….it’s about time that we stand up as people who are familiar with people who have a mental disability, and denounce all the myths and misperceptions ,that people who do not run into these situations on a day to day basis, and educate people instead of being that condescending person that people have the tendency to be when offended by the unknowing person’s lack of knowledge on the subject…if anyone has any questions or comments, feel free to send me an email at patrick.andrews@dshs.state.tx.us
the mentally impaired are generally not represented in a positive light, but how do you think they feel??? they are just as confused daily than a person who wonders why we have 365 days in a year. Give these people the time of day, and self-educate yourself on the topic of mental impairment people.