Sally Satel has an interesting article in yesterday's New York Times science section on how to fight the stigma of mental illness. Here's a sample from the conclusion:
Altering public attitudes toward the mentally ill depends largely on whether they receive treatment that works. This, in turn, sets in motion a self-reinforcing momentum: the more that treatment is observed to work, the more it is encouraged.
. . .
Antistigma campaigns are well-meaning but they lack a crucial element. No matter how sympathetic the public may be, attitudes about people with mental illness will inevitably rest upon how much or how little their symptoms set them apart.
This conclusion is based on the erroneous assumption that the symptoms of mental illness are visible to others. Can you really pick out the person with PTSD on the street? The person who is depressed? The person who is delusional but acting just like anybody else? As a retired outpatient therapist in a community mental health center, I know I sure can't. what is very visible in fact are the side effects of medications such as TD and akathesia. Sure there are exceptions, but Satel's article lumps every mental illness and every person with mental illness into one big basket and therefore concludes with a generalization that has no validity.
Posted by: Anonymous | 04/27/2009 at 09:44 PM
Thank you for posting the comments of 4/27/2009. Please go to www.nostigma.org to view members of the speakers' bureau "The Heard" present their stories. These are vital young people. All have experienced mental disorder and speak to encourage others. The National Mental Health Awareness Campaign's Speakers' Bureau "is devoted to removing the stigma surrounding mental disorders while also promoting mental health for everyone."
Posted by: martha | 12/06/2009 at 10:14 PM