Hardin's trauma

Are mental illnesses "myths"?

-Shruti Kirti Shrivastava

In his article, titled Revisiting the Myths of Mental Illness and Thomas Szasz, Dr. Bruce Poulson highlights the dynamic nature of the perceptions of mental illnesses even in the present-day scenario of increasing acceptance of mental illnesses and decreasing stigma surrounding the topic. Moreover, he emphasizes on the need to find a middle ground between the two extremes regarding such a perception- one of complete dismissal of the validity of the concept of mental illness, and one where excessive categorization has led to over-dependence on methods of treatments ranging from psychiatry to therapy.

While Szasz holds very radical beliefs about the ‘myth of mental illnesses’, his ideas highlight a crucial, albeit subtle, point about the “medical model for understanding human struggles and difficulties”. (Poulson 2012) The classification and the use of diagnostic models for understanding mental illnesses is often heavily influenced by, and in some cases, based upon, the cultural biases of society towards the perception of certain behaviours and groups. The best example of this is the fact that Szasz explicitly rejected the former model of classifying homosexuality as a disease. This classification had its basis in one of the indicators that define abnormality- violation of the standards of society (Butcher 4). In a time where homosexuality was seen as opposing the values and norms of society and, in turn, seen as abnormal, the classification of homosexuality as a disease of the mind was readily accepted by professionals around the world. The tendency of such parameters and indicators of classification to be inadequate is what was being opposed by Szasz.

Furthermore, the monopoly of the American Psychiatric Association over the classification and diagnosis of mental illnesses lead the author of the article to question how the soon-to-come Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5 (DSM 5) would affect public perception of mental health. The DSM 5 could, as Poulson puts it, “shape notions of normality and illness in ways that cannot possibly be anticipated.” (Poulson 2012) Attributes and kinds of human experience that might be within the individual’s coping level might be needlessly diagnosed as illness and as a result, increase dependence of the people on expensive methods of treatment. In addition, it could decrease their ability to be resilient and cope with normal stress (and possibly eustress or beneficial stress) on their own. Such unnecessary diagnoses could further lead to labelling, stereotyping, increased stigma, and loss of information (Butcher 7,8). However, the author recognizes the need and benefits of having “compassionate, non-discriminatory, science-based approaches” to dealing with certain issues such as autism and severe depression. (Poulson 2012)

On the other hand, the fear of pathologizing so called “normal human experience”, and medicalising the understanding of the struggles of human life (Poulson 2012) seems to run parallel to the philosophy employed in the treatment given by the Public Hospital in Virginia, USA- that patients need to choose “rationality over insanity” (Butcher 37). It implies that patients and mentally ill individuals are somehow choosing to not be able to adapt to “normal human experiences” as adequately as the “normal”, and are therefore opting to be diagnosed as mentally ill in order to take the easy way out by seeking help in various forms, including drugs and biological treatments. This idea, clearly, is unfair to those suffering through mental illnesses in their daily lives and lacks empathy for said individuals.

Szasz also believes that medical diagnoses of mental illnesses are “medicalising morality and the typical dilemmas and struggles of human life.” (Poulson 2012) This belief undermines the use of moral management to aid in the recovery of those diagnosed with mental illnesses- one which “emphasized the patients’ moral and spiritual development and the rehabilitation of their “character” rather than their physical or mental disorders”(Butcher 39). This method of treatment had actually proven to be highly effective. Moreover, the fact that such forms of therapy aided in reducing psychological discomfort and stress might point to the possibility that perhaps medicalising morality for the purpose of treatment might not be as counterproductive as Szasz makes it out to be.

In conclusion, while some beliefs of Thomas Szasz and others like him might have their basis in aspects of diagnoses of mental illness that can be improved upon, the fact that present-day treatment and diagnoses methods have offered much-needed relief to patients suffering through certain mental illnesses is inarguable. Therefore, the idea of an alternate reality wherein mental illnesses are disregarded completely and psychological treatments outlawed seems preposterous and far away from utopia.

Works cited:

Butcher, James N., Susan Mineka and Jill M. Hooley. Abnormal Psychology (Fifteen Edition). Indianapolis: Pearson, 2013. Print

Poulsen, Bruce. (2012, September 17). Revisiting the Myth of Mental Illness and Thomas Szasz. Retrieved from http://psychologytoday.com