Are mental disorders and mental illnesses real?

[DrFrog]

Lately--as in the past few weeks, months, and years--I've been considering the fallacies of modern/contemporary, popular attitudes towards abnormal psychology. The medical/biological/disease models have taken over. People have actually come to develop a belief system based around the notion that craziness can be diagnosed as a kind of illness, like pneumonia or gastroenteritis. But I understand why.

It's comforting and convenient to render things mechanistically and in familiar terms -- but God effin' dammit, if there was such a thing as psychic vomit, it would be pouring out of me every time direct reference or even vague suggestion was made about a person "having" depression, or anxiety, or mania, or psychosis/schizophrenia and so on... This is ridiculousness: that something is only valid when it is shared; if it is unique, then surely it is a symptom.

And what do we know about symptoms? They are a result of sickness -- and beyond which, they can be cured or ameliorated with the pharmaceutical wonders of the modern era. It would appear everyone has a diagnosis. We also enjoy the contradictory notion that psychology is valid but personal experience is not. And though it's certainly not a closed system, subjective human experience is all any of us as individuals have to go on... Who is anyone to lay claim to immutable truth? I suppose we are at any given time, given the religiosity of science.

I guess I'm just frustrated at the seeming impossibility of fully realizing the natural intersection of science, religion, and philosophy [here in the psychological sense]. Abnormal psychology cannot be adequately defined, and one begins to wonder if, more than anything else, it is simply a linear deviance from the commonly accepted norms of a society and civilization at a given time in a given place.

One of my favorite devices employed in fiction such as the X-Files is the answer to the question: Are the powers that be actually ordering a plot against me, or am I just experiencing paranoid psychosis? The answer: The powers that be are in actuality ordering a plot against me, and I'm experiencing paranoid psychosis. When humankind is better able to accept both as true at the same time, we'll be better off in the long run. Or to put it another way: When the subjective and the objective are no longer viewed as fundamentally exclusive, we'll be better off.

 

[Daniel E.]

if there was such a thing as psychic vomit, it would be pouring out of me every time direct reference or even vague suggestion was made about a person "having" depression, or anxiety, or mania, or psychosis/schizophrenia and so on...

It's one thing to say that psychology/psychiatry is overmedicalized. Marsha Linehan, the late Carl Rogers, and other big names in psychology would agree with that. It is woefully inaccurate, however, to say that mental illness is a myth, which is what you seem to be saying in the quote above.

Regarding schizophrenia, for example:

http://forum.psychlinks.ca/schizophrenia-and-related-disorders/15392-beyond-drugs.html

(In other words, overmedicalization does not mean that medications are less effective or that the disorders/symptoms are in any way less real. What it means is that other treatment approaches like therapy and social reintegration should not be sidelined.)

 

[white page]

Hi DFrog , Welcome to Psychlinks

When the subjective and the objective are no longer viewed as fundamentally exclusive, we'll be better off.

I hear what you are saying , I hear your frustration , are you reacting to a recent or past personal experience of incomprehension from your entourage or from the medical profession ?

I am not prying ,however your post seems to contain such a cry of deep frustration .

In the matters of mental pathologies , there are illnesses for which the 'linear thinking' diagnosis and chemical medication treatment are totally adapted , there are others which respond to a combination of medication and therapy , thus objective and subjective in harmony .

Many individuals would be in a state of terrible suffering and distress without a diagnosis and appropriate help chemical or psychogical.

In my experience a considered diagnosis is the first step towards acceptance and management of an until then mysterious and often terryifying state of suffering and distress.

Who is anyone to lay claim to immutable truth?

It is rare the person who does lay claim to immutable truth , what were you referring to when you wrote this?

best wishes WP

 

[NicNak]

Lately--as in the past few weeks, months, and years--I've been considering the fallacies of modern/contemporary, popular attitudes towards abnormal psychology. The medical/biological/disease models have taken over. People have actually come to develop a belief system based around the notion that craziness can be diagnosed as a kind of illness, like pneumonia or gastroenteritis.

So if it is not medical/biological/disease, what is it?

But I understand why.
It's comforting and convenient to render things mechanistically and in familiar terms -- but God effin' dammit, , or if there was such a thing as psychic vomit, it would be pouring out of me every time direct reference or even vague suggestion was made about a person "having" depression, or anxiety, or mania, or psychosis/schizophrenia and so on... This is ridiculousness: that something is only valid when it is shared; if it is unique, then surely it is a symptom.

I beg to differ, I assure you, there is no comfort in this diagnosis for those of us who are coping with it.

And what do we know about symptoms? They are a result of sickness -- and beyond which, they can be cured or ameliorated with the pharmaceutical wonders of the modern era.

I only wish this were entirely true. I am one who has had very moderate success with medication, but I do not denounce it's value. I have seen great results with medication in others.

It would appear everyone has a diagnosis.

Well, everyone would fall somewhere in the Global Assessment of Functioning.

Definition of Diagnosis
1 a: the art or act of identifying a disease from its signs and symptoms b: the decision reached by diagnosis
2: a concise technical description of a taxon
3 a: investigation or analysis of the cause or nature of a condition, situation, or problem <diagnosis of engine trouble> b: a statement or conclusion from such an analysis

I am unaware of any person who is of "regular" functionality who would classify being "healthy in mind" as a diagnosis, and even if it were to be, it is not limiting their functions in life.....

We also enjoy the contradictory notion that psychology is valid but personal experience is not. And though it's certainly not a closed system, subjective human experience is all any of us as individuals have to go on... Who is anyone to lay claim to immutable truth? I suppose we are at any given time, given the religiosity of science.

So if it is not valid what is it? What is the "truth"?

I guess I'm just frustrated at the seeming impossibility of fully realizing the natural intersection of science, religion, and philosophy [here in the psychological sense]. Abnormal psychology cannot be adequately defined, and one begins to wonder if, more than anything else, it is simply a linear deviance from the commonly accepted norms of a society and civilization at a given time in a given place.

Learning disabilities cannot be adequately defined either, do you denounce the legitimacy of that as well?

One of my favorite devices employed in fiction such as the X-Files is the answer to the question: Are the powers that be actually ordering a plot against me, or am I just experiencing paranoid psychosis? The answer: The powers that be are in actuality ordering a plot against me, and I'm experiencing paranoid psychosis. When humankind is better able to accept both as true at the same time, we'll be better off in the long run. Or to put it another way: When the subjective and the objective are no longer viewed as fundamentally exclusive, we'll be better off.

What "powers" are you refering to? Higher power such as God etc or "man" power etc?

Where is the concrete proof that higher powers are plotting against you or us. If there isn't anything concrete you can provide. I will have to assume this is a fallasy for the same reasons you made this statement.

or if there was such a thing as psychic vomit, it would be pouring out of me every time direct reference or even vague suggestion was made about a person "having" depression, or anxiety, or mania, or psychosis/schizophrenia and so on... This is ridiculousness: that something is only valid when it is shared; if it is unique, then surely it is a symptom.

 

[David Baxter PhD]

To be honest, I'm not certain what most of your rant is based on or where exactly you meant to go with this. However, a couple of quick comments:

People have actually come to develop a belief system based around the notion that craziness can be diagnosed as a kind of illness, like pneumonia or gastroenteritis.

Actually, the term "craziness" does not exist in psychology or psychiatry. Mental illness and mental health issues, on the other hand, can indeed be diagnosed by professionals trained to do so. The DSM is a summary of and a reference for how one goes about doing that, although there is a lot more to the process of differential diagnosis that simply checking off symptoms.

Abnormal psychology cannot be adequately defined

We can and do define psychopathology, and it is basically in terms of symptomatology, subjective distress, and interference with the capacity for day-to-day functioning of the individual.

Beyond this, I would remind you to carefully read the forum rules (see http://forum.psychlinks.ca/rules.phpin the top navigation bar of any page) and in particular this part:

the following are expressly prohibited on this Forum:

• POSTS THAT ARE ANTI-PSYCHIATRY OR ANTI-MEDICINE IN NATURE (there are other forums where you can engage in such debates -- this is not one of them).
• POSTS THAT ADVISE ANY MEMBER OR PEOPLE IN GENERAL NOT TO TAKE MEDICATION PRESCRIBED BY A LICENSED PHYSICIAN OR NOT TO FOLLOW ANY OTHER ADVICE GIVEN BY A LICENSED PHYSICIAN OR OTHER MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONAL (remember that only the individual's physician or primary therapist is likely to know the full medical or personal or family history of that individual).

 

[DrFrog]

Yea, most of that was unconsidered venting and of course in retrospect I realize this isn't the place for that sort of thing. It was more a public expression of personal feelings than anything else. Much of what was said was not meant, but what was meant was certainly felt. I'll try to make up for it by explaining things literally. If one disagrees, then at least the disagreement will be about something substantive.
It's not that the biological model of psychology is flawed. In fact, it could be seen as the most accurate since it's empirical, and there's little question about its efficacy and usefulness under certain circumstances and conditions. It's merely incomplete, and the strength of our commitment to it as a culture (at least in the U.S.) leads to certain problems: the exclusion of other models or approaches to psychology; prescription without proper therapeutic oversight, (or a rejection or excessive suspicion of all psychiatric medications in response to their popularity); pathologizing aberrant behavior through diagnoses and labeling, or self-diagnosis; and so on.

I'm too embarrassed to try and get much deeper or philosophical about psychology and the definitions of abnormal psychology at the moment. Though since it's my last post, I'll at least say it is essential for psychology to remain open.

 

[Jazzey]

Yea, most of that was unconsidered venting and of course in retrospect I realize this isn't the place for that sort of thing. It was more a public expression of personal feelings than anything else. Much of what was said was not meant, but what was meant was certainly felt. I'll try to make up for it by explaining things literally. If one disagrees, then at least the disagreement will be about something substantive.
It's not that the biological model of psychology is flawed. In fact, it could be seen as the most accurate since it's empirical, and there's little question about its efficacy and usefulness under certain circumstances and conditions. It's merely incomplete, and the strength of our commitment to it as a culture (at least in the U.S.) leads to certain problems: the exclusion of other models or approaches to psychology; prescription without proper therapeutic oversight, (or a rejection or excessive suspicion of all psychiatric medications in response to their popularity); pathologizing aberrant behavior through diagnoses and labeling, or self-diagnosis; and so on.

I'm too embarrassed to try and get much deeper or philosophical about psychology and the definitions of abnormal psychology at the moment. Though since it's my last post, I'll at least say it is essential for psychology to remain open.

I do hope this isn't your last post Dr.Frog. Debate is always good because it forces us to think a little deeper. We do encourage this kind of thing around here. We just ask that it not take on the appearance of anti-psychology or anti-psychiatric thought and that it remain within the purview of the forum rules. Other than this guideline, discussions are definitely welcomed and appreciated.

And thank you for elaborating. From your most recent post, I'm understanding that your objection is the narrowness of the approaches taken in applying psychology in the US. This makes sense to me - to remain flexible enough to be open to any and all models which can assist the patient. Having said this, this opinion is purely from the perspective of a layperson.

And please don't feel embarrassed. About this thread. As you can see, it provoked a lot of thinking from numerous people, myself included.

 

[white page]

No need to feel embarassed Frog , however why did you need to vent? was it due to personal experience of doctors or is it through the hearsay of others experiences ?
I am interested to know why you had/ have this reaction.

all the best wp

 

[Yuray]

Philosophy will find you.
Subjectivity and objectivity will always be fundamental despite burying ones head in the sand. Actually, when ones head is in the sand, one is prone to attack in a very sensitive region! Its a shame that was your last post. You have given many cause to think.

 

[Budoaiki]

I think you are talking about subjective bias in diagnosis?

I think that those who use statistics and medical studies in diagnosis earn the right to do so through education which continues throughout their career. Although there is no single infallible method for diagnosis or treatment, I think that is the reason why a doctor is required to have so much training.

I believe that also why the medical system places such a strong emphasis on the importance of the doctor patient relationship. Then the doctor can evaluate the patient, diagnose the symptoms and apply their knowledge of those symptoms and the patient in order to help them to the best of their ability.

I am sure that there are some cases where mistakes are made but no system is perfect and I think that is why there is so much work put into patient care and why there are so many regulations in place to prevent that from happening.