Identifying mental illnesses

Hokay, this will probably end up all over the place so please bare with me. :X

One of the most difficult things to define is the line that separates normal behaviours and states of mind from those that are abnormal. I think the majority of us would recognise that these two definitions would rest on a continuum, and whilst extreme cases of psychopathy might be fairly obvious to an observer, there's a major grey area in the middle.

Mental illness will be an issue in any society, and whilst many societies have made great strides in bettering their understanding of pathological behaviour and forming treatments and preventions, there's still no clear cut definition of what a mental illness is.

There are a number of things that people might take into consideration: is the person's condition causing them suffering, for example? Does the person display behaviour that is socially bizarre, breaks moral codes, or causes others around them to feel uncomfortable? Or is there another criteria that needs to be looked at?

There's never going to be one answer that will satisfy everybody, but it's interesting to see how much people disagree on this topic. If you take something like depression, it can be very difficult to distinguish between a 'normal' episode of depression, and one that is clinically diagnosable and requires an intervention. I'm sure that we can all recall an occasion where somebody has claimed to be depressed, and they're told to 'pull themselves together' ect. Is it just a case of people having to get a grip and sorting their lives out by themselves?

One of my favourite examples to show how people can disagree comes from a psychiatrist commenting on Jesus Christ.

"In short, the nature of the hallucinations of Jesus, as they are described in the orthodox Gospels, permits us to conclude that the founder of the Christian religion was afflicted with religious paranoia."

I really don't mean to turn this into another religion thread, but I think it's a brilliant way of using something that we're probably all familiar with and showing how people's interpretations can differ so radically.

There's also an ethical point of view to take into account. Are we doing more harm than good by attributing people with a diagnostic label?

Float spell check.

well to simplify it very, VERY much, you can say that when a persons small odditees starts to affect the way the person lives her life, and have negative effects on her life, it's abnormal/sick/and so on.

but of course, it's never that easy.

and well, without a diagnosis i'ts a bit hard to treat the problem.

That's right. A bunch of people can see Jesus resurrected and his miracles all around the same time and all be experiencing hallucinations.

Gall, that's the lamest crack on religion I've heard yet.

Nobody can tell you what to believe. We have our own experiences that give us reasons to believe what we believe.

I agree with Blizz...

Originally Posted by Vega

I'm sure that we can all recall an occasion where somebody has claimed to be depressed, and they're told to 'pull themselves together' ect. Is it just a case of people having to get a grip and sorting their lives out by themselves?

Having suffered from severe depression pretty much exactly two years ago, and finding myself in another one of those funks now, I can say that... a large part of it is having to get a grip, and focusing on those things that you can think rationally about. Most people have them. For me, at least these past... haha, twelve hours, is it? o_O... it's what's best for others, being able to be there for them, etc. etc. But, then again, mental disorders are characterized by difficulty doing just this, so it's not altogether cut-and-dry, for sure.

Originally Posted by Vega

I really don't mean to turn this into another religion thread, but I think it's a brilliant way of using something that we're probably all familiar with and showing how people's interpretations can differ so radically.

You don't have to use religion; you can simply use ideas of right and wrong in general.

Originally Posted by Vega

There's also an ethical point of view to take into account. Are we doing more harm than good by attributing people with a diagnostic label?

Not whatsoever. Diagnosis exist so that we have a universal system for identifying people's needs.

Originally Posted by Blizzaga

That's right. A bunch of people can see Jesus resurrected and his miracles all around the same time and all be experiencing hallucinations.

Gall, that's the lamest crack on religion I've heard yet.

well, have you ever heard of someone who wasn't already religious when seing jesus?

I'm all for the mentally ill getting help, but here's how I perceive societies view of psychological disorders:

The only reason that people are deemed "mentally unfit" is because of the general consensus of the population, (the Majority vs. the Minority). Put it this way, if everyone on the planet was crazy, and you were normal, they'd put you in the nut house.

"In the land of the Blind" is an example of what you're talking about, Link.

However, how else would be be able to evaluate mental problems other than by seeing how far from the majority a person deviates? What other benchmark could we use to measure it?

Originally Posted by Snapdragon

well, have you ever heard of someone who wasn't already religious when seing jesus?

Well, have you ever heard groups of people experiencing the same hallucinations simultaneously? And yes, plenty who weren't religious saw Jesus, since he traveled all over the place to teach. For example, when Jesus came into town on an ass. I doubt the entire town hallucinated. Or when a group of people witnessed Lazarus come back from the dead, and other miracles. No, too many of these happened and in different places to be called hallucinations.

Debunked.

And as for the mentally ill part, it probably depends on the illness right? I doubt that a person who thinks every other guy is Doc Holliday should be institutionalized, though they could receive house calls or something.

For the sake of discussion, I advise that we not carry the Jesus/appearances to disciples discussion any further, lest it overtake the topic completely. (Or someone use it in such a way that it is quite obviously on topic.)

This is pretty emotional charged topic, especially dragging Jesus into it. I'm gonna ignore that part for now.
My little brother is autistic, but not badly. We don't use any medication, and he doesn't go to a doctor for it. people say that autism is a metal illness, but it's not like his life is harder, he just needs to do things a certain way.
What I think is interesting is the line between mental illness and personaility?
I mean, some people are more sad personalities, but does that mean they have depression? There are genuine cases of depression, yes, but what if some people are just sadder then others?

I don't think this is really on topic on the rest of the posts, and I apologize...

Originally Posted by Skootle

This is pretty emotional charged topic, especially dragging Jesus into it. I'm gonna ignore that part for now.
My little brother is autistic, but not badly. We don't use any medication, and he doesn't go to a doctor for it. people say that autism is a metal illness, but it's not like his life is harder, he just needs to do things a certain way.
What I think is interesting is the line between mental illness and personaility?
I mean, some people are more sad personalities, but does that mean they have depression? There are genuine cases of depression, yes, but what if some people are just sadder then others?

I don't think this is really on topic on the rest of the posts, and I apologize...

as far as I know, autism isn't a mental illness, it's a neurological disorder.

...but it's a matter of defenition, i guess.

just to clarify on the Jesus thing- when I read that, I did not take thet phrase "halucinations of jesus" to mean that people who claimed to have witnessed him or his miracles were halucinating. the way I took it, was that Jesus had halucinations, ei: the devil appearing to him to tempt him, or sweating blood while praying before his crucifiction. maybe I read it wrong... but it sounded to me like the author of that was trying to say that Jesus had been halucinating because he was a religiously paranoid person.

Originally Posted by Snapdragon

well to simplify it very, VERY much, you can say that when a persons small odditees starts to affect the way the person lives her life, and have negative effects on her life, it's abnormal/sick/and so on.

but of course, it's never that easy.

and well, without a diagnosis i'ts a bit hard to treat the problem.

Mmm, I agree that a diagnosis would facilitate a treatment plan, although I do think that there's a potential problem with telling people that they're depressed or that they have x y or z schizophrenia. I'm sure that it could be a liberating experience for people to have a name for their condition in that there are numerous websites and support groups for people with similar states - but does it also make people 'play the role' of a depressed person? I think there's a legitimate sociological argument to be made for diagnosis almost enabling behaviour and persons displacing all personal responsibility onto their diagnostic label.

I do agree with you though - if you can't categorise these things then how would you treat them?

That's right. A bunch of people can see Jesus resurrected and his miracles all around the same time and all be experiencing hallucinations.

Gall, that's the lamest crack on religion I've heard yet.

And what about the people who’re adamant that they’ve seen Vishnu in whatever form he decides to show up as today? You don’t believe in Vishnu, so how would you explain those supposed sightings? And the Hindus have a monopoly over these experiences because their God made quite a few trips to India in his time, whereas Jesus was quite cheap with his time – typical carpenter eh? As bad as plumbers!

Discussing religion in this topic isn't supposed to be an attack, it's just to highlight how wildley people's views differ when it comes to mental states.

If you look at Jesus Christ and the claims that he made, and then you put them in a modern setting, maybe that'd help. For example there'd be some who'd accept his claims and maybe even celebrate them, but others would have him placed on a course of antipsychotic medication with the aim of having him having him selling his wardrobes in Ikea in a few weeks. A hundred years ago we’d have been discussing his Oedipus complex.

Let’s say a close family friend left his wife and children, parked himself under a tree for a few days and started recalling past lives. Coming from your religious background, how would you approach that? Give then a quick high-five and celebrate their Buddhahood?

The point is that what we perceive as being normal or abnormal is ultimately subjective, and what might be acceptable in one culture wont be acceptable in another. That has tremendous implications for how we approach mental illness. If I look outside my window just now and see Ganesha sipping a bloody mary and flipping through the latest issue of Cosmo with his trunk (not that I ever will of course – he told me he preferred Blender) there are those who would have me diagnosed with a disorder of perception. Although if I have a mental disorder for seeing Ganesha, then surely those who believe in Ganesha are in the same boat as me.

Originally Posted by *__Link__*

I'm all for the mentally ill getting help, but here's how I perceive societies view of psychological disorders:

The only reason that people are deemed "mentally unfit" is because of the general consensus of the population, (the Majority vs. the Minority). Put it this way, if everyone on the planet was crazy, and you were normal, they'd put you in the nut house.

Well if that were true, then we'd have a similar situation to what I described above don't you think? I think we're actually rather accommodating of people's cultural beliefs ect. That's why snapdragon's point is so important, because it's based on people's functioning, which in my opinion, is the crux of the issue. It's not about pointing out one another's quirks and perfecting them, it's about looking at how their condition is impacting their life, and the lives of those around them.

Nobody can tell you what to believe. We have our own experiences that give us reasons to believe what we believe.

I agree with Blizz...

But then how can you look to treat conditions like depression, anorexia nervosa ect.?

A lot of psychological disorders arise from disordered beliefs and thoughts. For example if you look up some of the cognitive explanations for depression, they emphasise the role of disordered thought. I don't really have time to go into much detail now - although I will later if anybody's interested - but these models examine the thought patterns of depressed people and how these might lead to clinical episodes. For example, it may be an underlying tendency to attribute stressful life events to a fundamental flaw or inadequacy of their being. Such beliefs can be extremely harmful in that every time they face a negative event, they will go back to these feelings of inadequacy, and self-blame.

You can't *make* somebody change their beliefs, but you can help them to. If you've ever spoken with a friend who's distressed then you'll have probably done something quite similar, by challenging their beliefs and helping them to come to more reasonable conclusions.

Originally Posted by Vega

or that they have x y or z schizophrenia.

x y or z ?