"Mentally Ill" does not mean "wrong on an issue"

[SoxFan]

I've had it with DUers who throw the term "mentally ill" around when discussing a person's political views. The simple fact that someone is wrong on a particular issue does not mean you have the right to start using mental health as a political cudgel.

I've battled depression. Other DUers have struggled with eating disorders, substance abuse, bipolar, and other conditions. We know how society still stigmatizes people with mental health conditions. It's this stigma that prevents many people from obtaining treatment that could bring badly needed relief to them and their loved ones.

My suggestion is that the mods start taking a hard line against this crap. There's absolutely nothing progressive about using mental health as a way to score cheap political points, and it has to stop now.

[Writer]

1. I'm with that.

It's a way of marginalizing viewpoints in a very cowardly way.

[old mark]

2. I worked in a mental hospital for years and found people of all political

persuasions among the patients. We always encouraged voting and participation in political affairs to those who were interested.
Sadly, the employees were forbidden to participate in any political activity other than voting-not even bumper stickers.

State mental hospitals are at the mercy of politicians, and people dealing with these illnesses should be encouraged to participate in the process.

mark

[Posteritatis]

The non-political thing probably makes some sense in that context

It sucks, to be sure, but I can understand people being worried about a substantial power imbalance there.

I'm glad to hear you guys were engaging the patients though; another little bit of ammo against the idea that mental hospitals are just "warehouses."

How bad is the political involvement with the hospitals down there? I haven't followed that as closely as I probably should - I've mainly been concerned with how the public at large treats the subject - but I keep hearing now and then about one politician or another, always a Republican or libertarian, who ends up saying that there's no such thing as mental illness and they should just Get Over It. People like that having a say in hospital funding is frightening.

[old mark]

51. As usual with a group of politicians running the show, there are frequent

and sometimes abrupt changes in policy, funding and priorities. Lost of people make lots of money off the supplies/drugs for the state hospital system, not aqlways with the patient's best interest in mind. Yes, we have periodic shutdowns of hospitals, most recent being Harrisburg State in 2004 or 05. Patients were sent to private facilities or relocated to other hospitals in the state system, as were most staff. The hospital where I worked is very conservative and has many many lawsuits from workers who were mistreated by the management. I was a union steward there and participated indirectly in several such lawsuits.

Staff had to be very carefull to limit their input to getting patients to register and vote, and NEVER to even suggest any partisanship or preference to patients.

mark

[SIMPLYB1980]

3. Yep.

:thumbsup:

[Posteritatis]

4. in before "but [person I dislike] is clearly insane!"

I agree entirely, in all seriousness. It seems a little less tolerant of that attitude now than it did in the past, where I'd see DUers arguing explicitly that "the mentally ill" - always a monolith! - should be deprived of various legal rights and the like - but it's still pretty bad.

There's a flareup in that bullshit in Canada lately too, which is also pretty bad. Ugh.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

10. Are you a doctor or a therapist? n/t

[Posteritatis]

13. Neither

Just a layman who was interested in peoples' attitudes towards mental illness over the years and had things happen that deeply underscored that interest.

I was studying it over the course of my history degree, then my SO and sister each very spectacularly bipolar and caught alllllll kinds of crap for it. The full spectrum of nasty reactions: just get over it, you shouldn't be taking medication because it's evil, we need to treat you like you're dangerous, you shouldn't be allowed to vote, etc etc etc. My autistic niece last year having a teacher who doesn't "believe in that sort of thing" hasn't exactly helped.

I really don't have much patience for some very popular views on mental illness, its victims, or the treatment of the same that haven't changed since the 1950s or even earlier. If you follow my posting history on DU you'll probably come to the conclusion that it's one of my rant buttons. ;)

[spiritual_gunfighter]

26. Oh

Well I agree with you totally. I have bipolar disorder and have been disappointed with many peoples attitudes towards mental illness on DU. Much of it is ignorance on the issue.

The thing that gets me the most is the "medication is evil". It it weren't for medication I would not be a productive member of society, period. Before medication I spent the better part of 2 years locked in my bedroom, now I am a functioning member of society and you would never know I suffered from bipolar disorder.

So I am with you on this subject.

[Posteritatis]

35. Yeah, that one drives me up the wall

Neither my sister nor my SO can function at all without their quite effective medications that don't turn them into mindless zombies or whatever else people claim psych meds all do these days. I know a few people who are bipolar and get by without medication through sheer force of will, but they're definitely exceptions to the rule (and I respect them enormously for being able to do so).

I do think a lot of the ignorance is deliberate, especially this many decades into people actually learning about the subject. I understand that to a point - the idea of the problem being in your mind as opposed to something more mundane and conventionally addressible is terrifying to a lot of people for very good reason, and they don't like the possibility that it's possible for that to happen to them - but that doesn't mean I have to like or support or endorse the viewpoint. People really should just, to use a phrase a lot of them use, get over it and learn something.

[mkultra]

43. I'm a practicing psychiatrist and i can say that Orly Taitz is clearly ill.

Can you can propose a model in which she is not?

[Posteritatis]

47. As I'm unqualified to propose any such model, I'm not about to try

As I said in my other response in this subthread, I'm an historian, not a psychiatrist, even if my decision to go in the former direction instead of the latter was an egg-on-a-rooftop sort of thing.

And my problem with the attitude this thread about is that it's generalized far beyond any high-profile individual - that it gets to the point of saying "all people who {viewpoint} have {disorder}," or "this guy did something dangerous/ridiculous/etc and got in the news, which means they're just {disorder}."

[Cetacea]

48. Interesting choice of name for a Pdoc.

How do you feel about ect?

[woo me with science]

49. Oh, god, you're not a multiple personality "psychiatrist," are you? nt

[mkultra]

44. .

[Warpy]

5. What we're seeing with a significant part of the population

really is a form of mental illness, the complete disregard of reality in favor of fantasy. It's cult psychology and it's far from healthy.

However, the term's misapplication regarding simple difference of opinion bothers me, too.

I know what real mental illness looks like. I don't honestly see that much of it on this board.

[Hannah Bell]

6. +100.

[lunatica]

7. I can tell the difference between being called crazy and being called mentally ill

My suggestion is to grow a thicker skin, because the mods can't delete all the posts because everyone has their pet peeve issues. That's a crazy idea. Note please that I didn't say it was mentally ill idea.

[Posteritatis]

11. Follow some threads here and you'll see a lot of armchair diagnosing

Person X has Y view, therefore they have disorder Z, which is a personal and moral failure, therefore anyone with disorder Z is going to simply be another fool holding view Y, etc.

The crazy/mentally ill thing is another issue (and I generally agree that there needs to be a tiny bit more epidermis there sometimes), but the train of thought I just only slightly strawmanned up there is frighteningly common, and not just here.

[SoxFan]

12. Fail

Take the "grow a thicker skin" crap and stuff it.

Some of us are more than a little tired of this. Some of us have seen our lives, our careers, and our families impacted because people with attitudes like yours perpetuate outdated and dangerous notions about mental health.

[Bluerthanblue]

15. word up-

i agree, and thank you for saying it so well.

:hi:

[lunatica]

17. Feeling sorry for yourself doesn't help anything

There's plenty of mental illness in my family and I full well know what true depression is and how families are impacted. You don't belong to some exclusive club where every 'victim' has to address their illness the way you dictate. Stuff your own urge to control what people should be allowed to say.

[SoxFan]

18. So, how is life in the 1950s ?

Say hi to Ike and Elvis for me.

[Bluerthanblue]

20. do you respond to people who use racial slurs and hate speech

with the same kind of 'it's your fault for being offended' assholery?

I doubt it. As one who has lived with not only the devastating effects that mental illness can have on a family- AND the hereditary gift of bipolar disorder, I call bullshit on your defense of minimizing and stigmatizing sufferers. Mental illness is MORE than 'true depression'- (and I in NO way am minimizing that condition)- Perhaps you might want to re-read your last sentence, and ask yourself if you enjoy being a hypocrite.

:thumbsdown:

[lunatica]

22. Self pity is the best kind 'cause you know it's sincere

Go for it! There's not just suicidal depression in my family but full blown bi-polar manic depression too. We don't find it offensive when people use the word crazy.

[Bluerthanblue]

27. has anyone you loved died as a result of untreated mental illness?

your arrogant name calling "self-pity" doesn't offend me as much as your attitude does.

No one is calling for a memorial day for those who are effected by mental illness- What the OP said was honest, and not "self-pitying" . You responded to it with an agenda that seeks to LEGITIMIZE using "mental illness" as a personal SLUR- Did the OP ask that the mods police threads, or simply point out the fact that calling someone you don't like, or don't agree with "mentally ill" is destructive and just plain WRONG?

What need do you have to defend this? My need to rail against it, is very personal, and very real. I've lived- first hand, the experience of one who HAS lost a loved one as a result of their being unable accept the fact that their brain didn't function properly without the aid of medicines that had finally been developed to help them live. I'm not wallowing in self pity- OR living in denial. The stigma that continues to linger around mental illnesses, and the state of denial that much of our society has about it being a question of "pulling yourself together" or "growing a thicker skin"- is only helped by your odd defense of this prejudice.

Maybe you haven't come to a place where you understand the reality that mental illness is NOT something one chooses to have- ?

When someone says "that's so GAY! do you think that's an acceptable way of dis ing others? They may have changed the word homosexual to "gay" but it's still referring to the same thing- it's an attempt to belittle/condemn/marginalize someone by labeling them as ________ . and it does harm.

:shrug:

[bobbolink]

30. Going out of your way to hurt and inflame others is a trait of the RW.

You badly need to find a mirror.

[laughingliberal]

67. Yes, it is. And one I am seeing a little too much of on an alleged Democratic site nt

[bobbolink]

70. A sense of superiority isn't the sole property of the RW.

Until this fact comes home to Dems, we will NEVER be a real party of power.

Independents see this superiority a long ways off, and they are not amused.

[bobbolink]

29. Labeling others and being spectacularly insensitive.

Not only NOT progressive... it belongs in the DSMIII.

Do you come here just to try to outrage people?

There is a cure for that now, yanno....

Jes' sayin'

[bobbolink]

28. My suggestion is you grow some sensitivity, and learn to LISTEN.

[lonestarnot]

8. Can it be referred to as mentally ill on an issue?

:evilgrin:

[Blue-Jay]

9. That's crazy-talk!

[UTUSN]

14. Flamers use that ploy to denigrate (in their view) others who disagree with them

Along with other terms from other conditions---like, "You have a comprehension impairment." It's their own ignorance in display besides being cheap. Whoops, I'm denigrating cheapness now by associating it with flamers, who really *are* the bottom of the barrel!1

[WonderGrunion]

16. Ed Schultz says that is "Psycho Talk"

:crazy:

Did you know DU has a smilie called "crazy"?

[bobbolink]

31. Yes, indeed, and that isn't his only blind spot. He has other ignorances.

I hope you are not using him as the measurement of liberated thought.

[elocs]

19. Here's a Rec because I have a goddaughter who has had a hell of a year battling schizophrenia

and it's no joke. Those on the other, the non-progressive side, have no problem with cheap name calling but why would we want to be like them? Some here are because they are intellectually lazy and it is easier to throw out a label or call names rather than making an intelligent discussion or in giving their opinion.

[bobbolink]

32. Being intellectually lazy is one thing. Being willfully hurtful after it is pointed out is quite

another.

I really believe that many come here to get their rocks off.

[Odin2005]

21. I agree. This BS doesn nothing but purpetuate the "mentally ill = violent" bigotry.

[Occam Bandage]

23. I'm mentally ill and wrong on many issues. nt

[Kitty Herder]

24. K & R !!!

[nolabear]

25. "Mentally ill" is a populist and not a diagnostic term. Don't conflate them.

People ask me all the time when they come to me for psychotherapy, "Am I mentally ill?" or "Am I normal?" I tell them that I don't think in those terms. As with physical illness, no one has anything that doesn't have some potential for activation in every one of us, and, ironically, it won't be the same in any two of us. We are all deluded in many ways; denial is a necessary defense against huddling in terror over the fact that we are so vulerable to pain and death. And every last thing we do is ruled by the chemical goings-on in our brains. You can control those chemicals, within limits, by pharmacology or by interaction with other human beings, the environment, nature, and a host of other things that cause the brain to produce those chemicals. If the brain produces a more-or-less average number of said chemicals, our interactions with others over our lifespan determine what percentages of endorphins, seratonin, melatonin, hormones (many), cortisol, etc. bathe our brain and how we act accordingly. Our higher order functions, i.e. thoughts and actions, connect those chemicals to events in the exterior world and reinforce things that are laid down very early, associating them with emotions and the unconscious responses that are created before we have those higher order capacities.

ALL our brains operate somewhere on the continuum. I don't hear voices or hallucinate, but I guarantee you if you give me the right psychotropic or deprive me of sleep or isolate me for long enough, I will. I happen to be a relatively calm person, a little too damped-down for my taste, but if I drank enough caffeine, did enough cocaine or speed and not too much, I would feel just wonderful as I would during a certain part of a bipolar swing, before it would go too far and my brain would tell me things that are not true about my own invinceability and how fantastic the world is, causing some incautious behavior (mildly put). I'm not paranoid, but enough trauma within the context of having no supportive counteraction would likely give me a whoppiing case of PTSD. The chemicals that casue these responses are exactly the same.

There are reasons people are the way they are, even freepers. Even Dick Cheney. Even Charles Manson. Sometimes the person is on a place on the continuum where their brain can't be changed by interaction with ours and they are too dangerous as a result of it, (the aforementioned Manson)and they have to be contained. Sometimes we, because our sense of what is tolerable or not (the aforementioned freepers and Cheney) don't want to get past our own anxiety and fear of what might happen were we to be vulnerable enough to work toward understanding and interacting with them. Sometimes they create such anxiety in us that we hate them and want to kill them (Iraq, death penalty, your average killer).

I have a cetain nervousness around here because I fear I may be perceived as a lecturer and there is truth in that, but when this comes up I do think it might be helpful to post this fact again and again. There IS no "us and them." There's just us. And I am an advocate for actually saying what we mean when we're tempted to use a catch-all term like "mentally ill." I'm more inclined, up until I can't tolerate the anxiety someone creates in me, to say "I don't understand your reality but I know it's as real to you as mine is to me. Can we find mutual territory?" When pushed too far my feet become total clay and I resort to "what an asshole!" But it's not that they've got a mental illness. It's that I can't stand the s.o.b.

[bobbolink]

34. "There IS no 'us and them' ". Beautifully, wonderfully put.

Thank you for some real wisdom. :applause:

Unfortunately, many here are immune to wisdom... they come here to hurt others.

But I hope you will keep speaking up for this!

[Posteritatis]

36. I want a "recommend comment" button for posts like these. (nt)

[cliffordu]

33. My favorite is when I disagree with someone or get cranky and

they say...."did you take your meds today...?"

And they are serious.....

[MH1]

57. Alert on those.

That's a lot different than "Michelle Bachmann is a nutcase" isn't it? Are we going after both expressions here, or just the ones that are already against DU rules, like what you mentioned?

[cliffordu]

59. Sorry - Not here at DU - in real life - It's a favorite

tactic when the family wants to end a conversation....

[rd_kent]

37. I agree. There is only ONE mental illnes one can diagnose from a discussion board...

and that is the religion disorder.

[SIMPLYB1980]

38. Atheism has it's disorders

as well.

[rd_kent]

39. How so?

How does NOT believing something become a disorder?

[SIMPLYB1980]

40. I don't believe in god and yet I have a chemical imbalance.

Is it that hard to understand? I mean it's fucking science.

[rd_kent]

41. OK, but the two are NOT related, so whats your point?

[SIMPLYB1980]

42. Most people who believe in a higher being or

a binding force are perfectly sane, even though I disagree with them totally.

[rd_kent]

46. I disagree.

To blindly believe something, even in the face of real conflicting evidence, without actual evidence to support the belief, is insane.


Would you consider someone who TRULY BELIEVES that Santa Clause exists insane? What about someone who believes the devil made them do it?

[saltpoint]

53. In a concurrent DU thread this topic is considered from the point of view of

a local church which is about to hold a bonfire of "Satanic" books.

I'm guessing that means books the church elders find objectionable for one or another reason.

Your point about "the Devil made me do it" is persuasive, IMO. When someone does a kindness for others, some religionists attribute it to his or her being God-imbued. When someone else does wrong against others, the Devil is blamed.

Ya gotcher angels up above and ya gotcher demons down below.

Which is a Dark Ages construct.

Tax-exempt churches are allowed to burn "Satanic" books, but if I decide that McDonald's restaurants are satanic, I'm not allowwd to burn one down.

Angel-demon belief has prompted witch-burning and book-burning over a long period, and it doesn't strike me that this is an incidator of mental health.

[lightningandsnow]

45. Thank you for posting this.

:hug:

Ableism should not be tolerated on DU.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

50. Is there not a psychopathology of conservatism?

There have been several discussions of this issue on DU in the past. Here's an example:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x191770

When people make statements like "Palin is Looney Tunes" or "Bachmann is batshit crazy" I really don't think it's a mean-spirited comment about the mentally ill. I don't think people are implying that mentally ill people are politically or morally wrong like Palin and Bachmann. I don't think people are saying that we should hate the mentally ill because we hate Palin or Bachmann. I don't see it as a slam of the mentally ill. Instead, I think they're implying that people like Palin or Bachmann or Beck or Limbaugh are more than just polically wrong or morally wrong. I think they're suggesting that they're not speaking or behaving normally and not thinking rationally or logically. I don't think in most cases that it's a slur against people with mental problems in general.

Those words don't really bother me and I had bad problems with depression in my youth. I had psychological counseling and did drugs as a consequence of my depression. I tried to commit an act against myself that I wouldn't care to go into here. And my cousin was mentally ill, was in an out of institutions her whole life, and died tragically as a result (she refused cancer treatment although she didn't understand what this meant and no doctor could be forced to administer it to her).

I think that many conservatives are not just politically wrong. I think many of them are not just morally wrong. I think some of them exhibit unnatural and abberant behavior and thinking. Some of them are sociopaths and have no conscience. They have no concern for their fellow human being. I think this exhibits a type of unnatural mental derangement. For me, concern for one's fellow human being is the natural state and the way mankind evolved. Women picked herbs and made potions to help the ill and dying and men shared the hunt with the rest of the tribe in order to survive. Conservatives have cultivated selfishness to a degree that it has become anti-social, anti-human behavior that is, in my opinion, a mental disease. Their love of death, their extreme authoritarianism, their paranoia, their selfish greed, their lack of remorse and inability to feel the other's pain, their deceit and belief that their end justifies use of any means while pretending to be Christians is a type of mental derangement. It's not normal thinking or behavior. It's not the type of thinking of lawful, ordered, and traditional human society. If a conservative politician refuses to accept science, denies global warming, denies that the Earth is more than 6,000 years old, and denies evolution, I just have to think that person is much, much more than just politically wrong. They are crazy. And if they actually do not really believe, deep down, that the Earth is only 6,000 years old but lead their lives as though they believed it, I think they're even more crazy. They completely irrational and out of touch with reality. If two people of any sex want to marry and a conservative finds a problem with it, despite the fact that it hurts no one, impinges on no one's freedom, and only serves to add more stability to society, then I find that totally illogical, irrational, and crazy. It's more, much more than just politically wrong. It's not a question of politics, of debate, or of ideas. It is the rejection of clear thought. I'm not suggesting that, if there is a psychopathology of conservatism as some psychologists have suggested, that this gives them an excuse for their words and actions. There's still freedom of choice. I don't think that if they do have a mental disease, that they are unable to see right from wrong in most cases.

Therefore, I don't object to those who call people like Palin and Bachmann crazy. I think they are, too.

[Juche]

62. The problem is the association

Bachmann and the others are socipathic, self centered and grossly uninformed. However that is a far cry from the symptoms of bipolar, schizophrenia or depression.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

64. I didn't say they were schizophrenic like my cousin was

But in my mind, a sociopathic personality when it appears in right wingers justifies calling them crazy, without being seen as a slur on all the mentally ill. These people seem to be unable to feel compassion or empathy.

[mwb970]

69. Thank you.

I was beginning to think I would get to the end of this thread without a single person clarifying the issue as you have. I'm way too lazy to formulate such an articulate post, but I agree 100%!

It's not that conservatives are wrong on one issue, or two, or three. It's really not even that (by my standards) they are wrong on virtually every issue. The problem is that their entire worldview is just so cockeyed, so blatantly at odds with observable reality, that at some point it just has to be seen as a mental condition of some kind.

Thanks for taking the time to write such a great post!

[saltpoint]

52. Point taken, although it remains that willful ignorance in the face of

overwhelming facts to the contrary does suggest disordered behavior.

The DSM-IV can sometimes paint broadly, but "defiance" is a factor. So are characterologic issues on Axis II.

A FOX news commentator -- or whatever he is -- like Glenn Beck might charitably be called a "capitalist," because he knows how outrageous remarks can equal significant ratings and thus high profit. But that's the charitable assessment.

Or one might say that lying on the public air waves is "not acceptable adult behavior," but the provocation sought is a more grievous offense to fairness.

It is fair, IMO, to invoke disordered conduct to scale disordered conduct. We are not limited to referring to people with whom we disagree as "capitalists" when they behave in disordered, unstable, provocative, egotisticial ways.

One may be entirely sympathetic toward people battling mental health issues and still find someone like Glenn Beck a nutbag.

[saltpoint]

54. There are times when it does. Where would a clinician place Fred Phelps,

for example, who with a small cadre of like-minded associates, stands as near as he can get to military funerals screaming "God Hates Fags" at the top of his lungs at the gathered mourners?

That does not suggest behavior within acceptable limits. A grade school kid knows better than to behave like that. Should Histrionic be considered? Do we just say, "Well, we have no clinical on this, so we can't respond." ?

Well, I do respond. On Axis II, Phelps appears to suffer from Total Asshole Disorder (TAD).

[zanne]

55. As long as the stigma remains...

Many people will live unnecessarily miserable lives. Al Gore's wife tried to work on de-stigmatizing mental illness. That was one of the reasons I wanted him to win so badly. She would have been a great ally.

[MH1]

56. "Mentally ill" when used to describe political actions, CLEARLY does not mean

* depressed
* having an eating disorder

It is also not a diagnosis of particular substance abuse (but I guess we are also not allowed to say, "give me some of what he's smoking!" anymore?), or bipolar behavior (altho a reference to extreme hypocrisy or flip-flopping might be termed, inaccurately I'm sure, "schizo" with no intention to actually diagnose schizophrena).

So I am not sure why it is problematic for people who have "struggled with" these things to have a problem with the term being used in a context that clearly does not apply to them.

I also don't think, as I've seen it used at DU, it is in any way being used as a "cudgel" to "score cheap political points". It's mostly just part of venting about a common enemy (batshit whacko republicans - is that phrase ok?), using common language.

On the other hand, of course referring to a DUer or a group of DUers as "mentally ill" is already against board rules and should always be alerted.

[backscatter712]

58. Does this mean I can't do a Glenn Beck costume this Halloween with a straitjacket?

:evilgrin:

I suppose cartoons like this one are out too.

[Juche]

60. Thank you. I had psychosis as a teenager

And it bothers me too when people associate neurological conditions with insults for people they disagree with. Its no different than calling someone you disagree with a faggot or saying women are too stupid to be president.

You're the only person I've added to my buddy list in the 3 years I've been here because of this post.

[mix]

61. k&r

[Odin2005]

63. One poster had the audacity to use my Asperger's as an excuse to dismiss my criticism...

...of the "vaccines cause autism" nonsense, it was that "autistic close-mindedness" ya know! :eyes:

That was some offensive crap.



Anyway, people should be wise to differentiate neurosis from actual mental illness. Neurosis is becoming a victim of one's own cognitive biases. Many extreme ideologues, conspiracy nuts, and woo-woos are neurotic, but not mentally ill.

[saltpoint]

65. If during a session Rick Santorum told his psychiatrist that the Supreme

Court decision in Lawrence v. Texas would usher in a reign of man-on-dog sex across the expanse of Christendom, what do you think the shrink would think?

I think he'd be reaching for the DSM-IV in no time flat.

[LWolf]

66. It depends on your definition of "progressive."

If you mean "liberal left," then I would agree. There's nothing "progressive" about bullying of any kind to make a political point.

Yet it happens all day, every day, at DU.

[cayanne]

68. It keeps the stigma going

As a person who lives well with chronic depression, I agree with you.