Redefining Mentally Ill

[shimmerz]

@joeylittle, agenda? Really?

I honestly can't believe the response to this post. If there is offense taken in this post than I feel that those who are offended need to take a look at why that is happening within. If I chose not to call myself obese if I was, would people who were obese be offended? Would there be a kazillion posts if I wrote such? "I am 300 lbs but I am NOT obese". Would I get 200 posts in response insisting that I was? Who cares? Seriously?

I can't walk outside because I have been conditioned to be terrified. This amongst other things I have been conditioned to due to the abuse and neglect that was meted out to me. This is how I choose to see it for reasons of my own. If there are some of you who are offended then I suggest you speak to a therapist or move on. If you are offended then that is your own issue and not mine.

 

[joeylittle]

Because yes - even if you 100% believe that PTSD has nothing to do with being mentally ill - you are not helping anyone by pushing an agenda. I'm not saying that is happening right now in this thread, but it was, and it can happen very easily.

Yep, agenda. As in: a stated plan for something. I'm not really meaning it with a negative connotation.

This thread started with two things - your own experience of really intense stalking, harassment, bad things being done to you by really bad people, and you were (and are) the person having to pay the price for things they did to you. And that, I say absolutely - those are your feelings, your experience, and if you reject the catch-all label of "mentally ill" because you see yourself as having been injured BY the mentally ill people - you are absolutely, unequivocally entitled to your belief, and I do not mean that passive-aggressively.

But the thread also had some more global statements - I looked for the best one, and I think it is this:

I think what I am trying to say is that I am mentally unwell (obviously) but mentally damaged by those who were mentally ill. This may seem like a small distinction but to me it is quite large for reasons I stated above. I feel like using the term mentally ill for people who have been victimized into self protective behaviours and fear responses should be treated differently within the mental health system (and the system at large) than those who victimize others. IMO thisis less black and white thinking than calling the victims of the perpetrators the same label as those who injure others - with my stance being that these perpetrators are given the golden seal of approval by error of omission.

This is a complicated statement. But the thing I read clearest in it is that you believe there's something systemically wrong with the term "mentally ill". That people cannot suffer from mental illness so much as that people with mental illness inflict suffering.

And there are some other statements where (probably coming from the extreme stuff you had going on at the time) you were advocating for what sounded like a reversal of the term "mentally ill". That "mental illness" should ONLY apply to perps.

That's an agenda, in my book.

So, I identify as having a mental illness, and for me, it's bio-chemical/hereditary, and I'm not sure how my PTSD intersects totally with it, but I recognize those symptoms also as part of a mental illness that I have: and I am not out there hurting people. Nor do I have an active relationship with those who hurt me. I am so very sorry that you have the things you're dealing with in your life, I think it's all incredibly un-just and just horrible.

But you don't need to take my identity away in order to change your own. That's all.

And as to your example:

If I chose not to call myself obese if I was, would people who were obese be offended? Would there be a kazillion posts if I wrote such? "I am 300 lbs but I am NOT obese". Would I get 200 posts in response insisting that I was? Who cares? Seriously?

Yeah, I'd be one of those people telling you to not take away something that is a clinically recognized fact - obesity - just because you chose to not identify with it. You make your choice, I make mine.

And who cares? We all do, when it's this personal and emotional.

The question @Kas_Can_Fly asked was:

Does anyone else feel that by trying to get away from the term mentally ill or by redefining it we ourselves are furthering the stigma of it

And in my post I was explaining why I agree.

So, to circle back around: I wasn't actually intending to call you out with the use of the word "agenda". I didn't say, @shimmerz has an agenda - I was referring to the larger question that was being debated earlier in the thread, which was whether or not mentally ill should be re-defined. You seemed to posit that, sure, but others agreed with you.

So I'm sorry to have gotten your back up. I respect your right to your own identity. Just don't tell me mine. And in my opinion, anyone who gets very vocal about how only the perps are mentally ill - anyone doing that is furthering the stigma of mental illness, and that's hard on those of us who believe we have a mental illness.

 

[shimmerz]

That "mental illness" should ONLY apply to perps

That is not an agenda, it is my belief. That there should be a distinction. That would mean that those of you who are not perps are not lumped in with those that are. That is what you did not pick up in this posting.

I am tired of having people ask me (because I have PTSD) if I am going to punch them. I am tired of people asking me if I am violent. No. I am not them. Most likely nor are you. But those that are prone to violence should have a distinction as they will be a threat to others. I feel like it is better for society that way. I am pretty sure I have said this over and over in this posting.

I don't, nor have I ever seen a stigma in mental illness. I do, however, see a stigma with violent folk (who sometimes are and sometimes are not seen as mentally ill).

I'm not really meaning it with a negative connotation.

Not to tell you what you are meaning, but it is certainly coming across as negative. I will take you at your word when

anyone doing that is furthering the stigma of mental illness,

this attitude goes away.

 

[joeylittle]

That is not an agenda, it is my belief. That there should be a distinction. That would mean that those of you who are not perps are not lumped in with those that are. That is what you did not pick up in this posting.

OK, that's cool - I think I understand what you are saying.

Can you understand that your belief is opposite to my belief? I believe I have a mental illness. I believe it is likely, though not automatic, that those who perpetrate crimes also have a mental illness. I don't think being a criminal automatically means you have a mental illness - I just think it means you are a criminal.

Can you recognize my belief as not infringing on yours? If you can, then all is well.

But if you actually think your belief should become everyone's belief - that there should actually be a new definition of mentally ill, applied to all people - then I have a hard time not seeing that as something more than a belief, but seeing it as a thing to accomplish. And that's where it seems like you must have some sort of stigma against mental illness as it is currently defined - though that's just my reading of it, only you would know what you are thinking.

Really, I just accept that I have a mental illness and am engaged in defending myself against the thought that "only bad people are mentally ill". That's probably the most straightforward way I can put it, as to where I'm coming from.

 

[Kas_Can_Fly]

But those that are prone to violence should have a distinction as they will be a threat to others.

But what "they" are is not mentally ill - they are abusers, criminals, anything else they may or may not be is irrelevant. That is the term you are looking for - people don't like using that term because it's bad - but people who do bad things are "bad" and therefore the term must be applied correctly. Referring to a bad person as mentally ill because someone is trying to lessen the blow is an insult to those with mental health, reinforces stigma and is factually incorrect. Are mentally ill people abusive, are black people abusive, are white 28 year old white males abusive - no - abusers are abusive.

The conflict here seems to be over the term mentally ill - but mentally ill means one thing and one thing only: Having an element of mental ill health - usually defined by an element of suffering. I can't even see how this can be confused with being abusive in any way, let alone criminally so. But to back it up here's a definition of what Mental Illness means:

A mental disorder, also called a mental illness or psychiatric disorder, is a mental or behavioral pattern or anomaly that causes either suffering or an impaired ability to function in ordinary life (disability), and which is not developmentally or socially normative. Mental disorders are generally defined by a combination of how a person feels, acts, thinks or perceives. This may be associated with particular regions or functions of the brain or rest of the nervous system, often in a social context. Mental disorder is one aspect of mental health. The scientific study of mental disorders is called psychopathology.

It's such a massive language barrier that I can't wrap my head around so I'm sticking to facts but for some reason the facts mean something else to some people and I don't know why.If by some other definition someone believes that PTSD is does not count as a mental illness though I can't see how, surely at least, you recognize that depression is. Most people with depression are not abusive, most people with depression aren't even abusive towards themselves. Only abusive people/abusers are.

If you were 300lbs and thought you weren't obese the likely chance is you would be delusional or in denial and so be it - not offensive but fact. The only person who can change your mind is you but no matter how much it might irritate you, you would be wrong (unless you lifted some serious weights!). If however you say: I'm 300lbs but I'm not obese because all obese people are ugly (or violent or some other insult). Then all the people who you've just insulted have every right to be upset.

If you've/others have been told by someone that being mentally ill makes you violent, they were wrong. Fact. Not you, you did nothing wrong when they said this, but they did. Do more than 50% of the worlds population believe that mentally ill people are abusive? No, but even if they did they would be wrong. Is this stigma? Yes, fact. The problem is now you are being affected by their words and are repeating them - and so the stigma grows. Stigma however is more than this, it's not just insulting some set of people it's a form of manipulation that affects generations and holds people back. Stigma is centuries of women being downtrodden and abused and not even trying to fight for anything better because they believed they were less than men and deserving of the abuse and they thought it was normal, as much as the men did.

The only way to get the correct information out there is by spreading the truth but this can never happen if mentally ill people don't want to be seen as mentally ill because the very reasons that the stigma is about. This thread is just this. It's single-handedly offensive to every person here and even more who aren't and it perpetuates hate against ourselves. It IS furthering mental health stigma and it's playing divide and conquer.

 

[shimmerz]

I would be okay with all of this if society didn't use mental illness as a way of justifying
1. police murders
2. use it as an answer why children murder other children in school
3. use it as an excuse for not listening to those who have a 'mental illness'

Look up police murder mentally ill and if one is open to it they will see that the mentally ill card is used many, many times to justify murders, paint pictures by the media that mentally ill kills or causes others to kill. Myself personally, I feel that is a very large cause for the bad wrap that others speak about in being labelled mentally ill.

If a police officer shoots a mentally ill person most people breathe a sigh of relief and say 'thank god the police are keeping us safe'. Well any of those mentally ill people could be you or I. It doesn't mean we are dangerous. I am saying it can be used to relieve one of responsibility. And those relieved of the responsibility may well be abusers. What if I were to say 'I killed so and so because he was an abuser'. Would people breathe a sigh of relief? However many bad deeds can be seen as ok if one is determined mentally ill. Trust me, I know. Been there done that. Abusers can get out of control using the mentally ill card.

Yes, absolutely, each of us should be allowed to understand that others have differing points of view. Where I feel the line is drawn in the sand is when people say that my belief 'makes them feel' substandard. It is not meant to be hurtful and is mine to hold if I choose to without others driving me into the ground on the pretense that I am making them feel badly.

There is often much upheaval and 'feel bad' or uncomfortable before, what I believe to be necessary changes be put into place. In all honesty I am fighting for the mentally ill - not against. I feel that those termed mentally ill have had their power taken away with just a whisper from others who mutter 'he/she is mentally ill'. It is a game changer

 

[shimmerz]

One of so many.....

Link Removed

Kelly Thomas is another good example.

 

[Hashi]

@shimmerz, I have to say I feel you're mixing up different things here.

I am female and some of my trauma was directly related to that. One of my abusers was female and she also had experienced trauma related to that, which I believe led to her becoming abusive herself. It serves no purpose for me to say that I don't want to be labelled female, because it was my abuser who was female.

You may not think that's what you're saying, and it may not be what you intend to say. I just want to make the point that it's all I can understand of what you're saying here.

Yes, a mentally ill person might refer to mental illness as a way to get off the hook for a police murdrer, or for abusing me, or whatever. Whether that's justtified or not, in my view it makes no difference to the fact that I'm mentally ill myself.. And me identifying myself as mentally ill doesn't make me the same as them. In the same way as I'm not the same as everyone with an underactive thyroid. or Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, or female gender, or red hair, or any other label that I fit.

 

[joeylittle]

I would be okay with all of this if society didn't use mental illness as a way of justifying
1. police murders
2. use it as an answer why children murder other children in school
3. use it as an excuse for not listening to those who have a 'mental illness'
Look up police murder mentally ill and if one is open to it they will see that the mentally ill card is used many, many times to justify murders, paint pictures by the media that mentally ill kills or causes others to kill. Myself personally, I feel that is a very large cause for the bad wrap that others speak about in being labelled mentally ill.
If a police officer shoots a mentally ill person most people breathe a sigh of relief and say 'thank god the police are keeping us safe'.

I'm just not sure how prevalent any of this actually is - or rather, how it relates. Police shooting a schizophrenic because they perceived a threat; well, often the threat is real enough, but the police don't have the training or experience or equipment to handle it the way an EMT might. I don't see that as mental illness "justifying" anything; it doesn't make the murder OK. It's just fact, and speaks to the lack we still have (in the US) of appropriate care, resources, options for the person who is ill.

Sometimes mental illness is the answer to why children kill children. But I don't think it is used to justify the rightness of the murder. There is a kind of legal defense involving non-competency - the "insanity" plea - that is used in about 1% of US trial cases and successful about one quarter of the time. http://law.jrank.org/pages/1136/Excuse-Insanity-Empirical-data-myths.html
(please read this article. It is very, very illuminating about the data surrounding the insanity plea)

Yes, your number 3: many people dismiss the mentally ill as "crazy". And that sucks. But I think the way to change that is more likely to be education than re-classification.

I think there is no data that most people "breathe a sigh of relief" when they hear that an officer has killed someone with a mental illness. I'm certainly guessing that at least the 1 adult out of every four who suffers from a mental illness in any given year (PRIDE OF AUSTRALIA: ROSIE BATTY WINS COURAGE AWARD) isn't heaving a sigh of relief. Maybe the other 3/4 are. I just don't buy it.

Yes, absolutely, each of us should be allowed to understand that others have differing points of view. Where I feel the line is drawn in the sand is when people say that my belief 'makes them feel' substandard. It is not meant to be hurtful and is mine to hold if I choose to without others driving me into the ground on the pretense that I am making them feel badly.
There is often much upheaval and 'feel bad' or uncomfortable before, what I believe to be necessary changes be put into place.

The bolding is mine.

You may think your belief is not meant to be hurtful. But as far as I can tell, in this paragraph above, you are saying that there are necessary changes to be put into place. That's an action item. Your action item takes away part of my identity and actually makes my life harder.

If I am understanding what you want: you want mentally ill, as a term of art, reserved for those with "broken brains" - dangerous impulses, harmful to others, abusive behavior. I know the list is longer - but that is your general point, I think.

And that those of us who are currently mentally ill would instead be "mentally injured" or some such. Which means there is no such thing as heredity or neurobiology in the understanding of mental illness. And if there is no such thing as that, well then, I don't qualify for care because I was depressed before anyone laid a hand on me. My brother wouldn't have qualified for care until he had a psychotic break in public - a break that was a result of not having access to care - and then, at that point, he'd be classified as "broken brain", criminal, and we would all heave a sigh of relief when the police shot him.

This is a complicated, emotional topic. I really am respecting your opinion. But your opinion doesn't automatically get to become the right thing to do without you running the risk of hurting people who would be negatively affected by your "necessary changes".

I just wish you could see that it is, actually, hurtful - because your whole idea is predicated on "mental illness" being a term that is ONLY used negatively. You yourself pretty clearly believe that it IS negative. So, as long as I'm one of those people, you are saying that I am "wrong" for being so. And I get that you are trying to fix that, but your solution is one that would negatively affect many, many people. I've got super-thick skin; I'm not crying "wounded!" over this - but politically, and I mean this very respectfully - this:

In all honesty I am fighting for the mentally ill - not against.

Is maybe not your battle to fight, if you don't identify as mentally ill.

 

[shimmerz]

My experience with the mental illness label has been less than helpful. My abusers created it to cut me off from aid when I needed it. Police heard the term mental illness and dismissed any concern I had because they could. And they did....repeatedly. It is this perspective of how mental illness can be used against someone that I am speaking from. And radically, I am going to say (not to hurt anyone but because it happens) that society has an image of how mental illness looks (although in fact the spectrum is very complex) and what society should be okay with when dealing with someone who is mentally ill.

I understand that many with mental illnesses have access to services and therapy that they need and that is obviously helpful. I get it. I am not dismissing that. I am speaking from a different frame of reference. I am speaking of those who use the term as a means to further victimize, to shut up the victim so that others don't hear them. It happens. I lived it. Still do. I am still running because of it - 7 freaking years later.

Can you see how some are actually not helped by the mental illness label? That it hurts them rather than helps them? That society dismisses them? Are they bad people or psychopaths or something else? Am I mentally ill or a victim or something else? Hard to fit the essence of something into two words imho. Look at the number of posts here (and those of us deemed as mentally ill can't figure it out). Why not? Because it isn't a one size fits all thing. We all come from different places.

No I don't profess to speak for all but I am speaking for those who are being shut up in a society that allows two little words to change everything in one's life experience. Mental illness.

 

[joeylittle]

My experience with the mental illness label has been less than helpful. My abusers created it to cut me off from aid when I needed it. Police heard the term mental illness and dismissed any concern I had because they could. And they did....repeatedly. It is this perspective of how mental illness can be used against someone that I am speaking from.

That's just painfully awful. And from that perspective, I really do understand where you are coming from. It's a discrimination issue, and it's wrong.

Can you see how some are actually not helped by the mental illness label? That it hurts them rather than helps them? That society dismisses them? Are they bad people or psychopaths or something else? Am I mentally ill or a victim or something else?

Yes, absolutely - I can see how the label "mentally ill" can still be a cause for discrimination, they way you experienced it. No question. And it is just infuriating. A mental illness is a valid disability, and the status of "mentally ill" should not be used to cause fear, or render someone invisible, or unreliable. What happened to you is frightening. It's a very real example of how there still is powerful discrimination and stigma against those who are mentally ill.

So I think, the aspect where we are on different sides of the coin (cube? it's a complicated one, not really just 2 sides) is that I believe mental illness is a disability status, deserves recognition as such, and discriminating against someone because they have been diagnosed as mentally ill is morally and legally wrong. I think society should move towards accepting this; it is already accepted by many, and that battle for acceptance has been going on only for the last 40 years or so.

And I think you are coming from the position that the term "mentally ill" is still far to easily subverted and turned into a reason to fear, deny, and marginalize people who are suffering. That it is too easy for abusers and authority figures to apply the label of Crazy, a.k.a. "mentally ill", therefore rendering the labelled individual powerless. You would like to see society understand that those who use the term "mental illness" to purposefully stigmatize and discredit are quite often motivated to do so in order to silence someone they have abused or are abusing, and that those people are sick and dangerous. That if mental illness is going to retain it's negative power as a label, it might as well apply more properly to those who truly should be feared - abusers, psychopaths, and others who engage in criminal acts.

I have a great-aunt who was lobotomized in the US in the late 1940s. Looking at the reasons why, it's very likely she was suffering from severe post-partum depression. It's terrifying to me, thinking that 70-odd years ago a person could have part of their brain disconnected just because they were uncontrollably sad. That mental illness was, in a way, a medical aberration that should be surgically removed.

And stories like yours are equally terrifying. That you, a person who was abused, should be denied help from the proper channels - the police - on the basis of your abuser, the true criminal, claiming that you are incompetent, unable to make such claims, because you are mentally ill.

I am so sorry that you have been discriminated against in this way - and I'm glad that I have the right to medication, therapeutic treatment, and appropriate accommodations. I sincerely hope that there is an end - soon - to the perversion of the concept of mental illness, so that people in your situation can be heard and be given their full legal rights, so that they may survive; and I also hope that the solution to that doesn't involve taking away the rights and accommodations that people in my situation need in order to survive.

And again - I am really very sorry and angry for/about what you have gone through.

 

[shimmerz]

That if mental illness is going to retain it's negative power as a label, it might as well apply more properly to those who truly should be feared - abusers, psychopaths, and others who engage in criminal acts.

Yes. Great words.

@joeylittle , it was your posting that had me see why the label is good for some. I so appreciate your taking the time to try to understand. At this point in my life especially, that means more to me than I can articulate properly. When this posting went active again I have to tell you my heart sank. 'Oh no, not again' seemed to be the feeling that coursed through me. I appreciate your efforts and tenacity.

It would be great if not many people understood this issue from my perspective. I hate to see this going on but it does. I hope that those of you who are embracing the mentally ill label are not having to put up with attitudes of others that may put you into a marginalized place or worse still, mindset.

PTSD is not my definition of me. It may be to others but I plan on continuing on being me - not PTSD. It is a tough road though. I get it now when T-doc expressed his concern at my telling people I had PTSD. It changes other's attitudes. I just wish that the media had a more balanced way of portraying what PTSD and/or mental illness is.