Re:Alternatives to the Medical Model

My two-pennuth on that is that as long as we interpret unusual patterns of behaviour\experiences as problems with an individuals psyche we completely miss two major dimensions to what we observe. These are the cultural restrictions and emotional inhibitions that amplify and yet isolate and categorize an individual and their powerful experiences. Most of us are responsible for this, unconsciously. For example, sudden powerful physical and mental changes that help us restructure our psyche are often interpreted as breakdown, panic attack, schizophrenia etc. There is no understanding of what is going on except in an irrelevant chemical sense, but unfortunately, understanding these things only goes so far as to say that they are 'disorders'.

The second, related aspect we miss is this. What we observe in an individual when they are experiencing short or protracted unusually intense experiences is interpreted pathologically. This is a major error in our understanding of the dimensions to the human psyche and misses the way in which humans NATURALLY process their feelings. The particular discipline that supports this pathological approach is called psychology, or psychiatry. Current psychiatric practice supports the pathologisation of emotional processes we do not understand, or are afraid of. This belief system also supports the philosophy of, and merchandising of, current trends and findings in technology, particularly chemical control of natural processes.

The climate of emotional inhibition and pathologisation of natural human processes, and the application of a philosophy based on current cultural fashion, promotes and sustains a disenfranchised community. This community is comprised of individuals who experience things that are not acceptable by the belief system of mainstream psychiatry. This officially endorsed belief system has had a catastrophic effect on the mental and spiritual dimensions that are naturally present within a culture, and has been equally disastrous to its individuals labelled as 'ill'.

But did we really assume that the philosophy behind the approaches to experiences and behaviour that is being practised by a cultural elite was fundamentally true? Did we assume that the bible was fundamentally true? The point I am making is that psychiatry itself is a cult. We really dont have to join.
The alternatives are out there, but WE have to change.

Replies:

"De-pathologizing" and the "myth of mental illness", by Todd I. Stark (toddstark@aol.com), 12/22/00 Modern myths, by jj, 12/24/00 Schizophrenia and gravity, two modern scientific myths, by Todd I. Stark (toddstark@aol.com), 12/27/00 "First images" claimed to be found of the impact of Schizophrenia on the brain, by Todd, 09/25/01 Re: Schizophrenia Brain Research, by Robert DePaolo, 02/12/02 Re:first imgA, by craig, 06/08/02 Re:first imgA, by craig, 06/08/02 Re:Schizophrenia and gravity, two modern scientific myths, by Monica, 06/23/02 Heritability and mental illness (long), by Todd, 06/28/02 Re:Schizophrenia and gravity, two modern scientific myths, by anonymous, 04/12/03 Culture and the origins of illness, by Todd I. Stark (toddstark@aol.com), 12/27/00 Re:Modern myths, by James Le Lievre (Australia), 09/16/03 Re: Pathology and "Mental Illness", by Zan0637, 01/28/02 Re:Alternatives to the Medical Model, by Meditator, 06/29/02 schizphrenic as failed mystic: again with feeling, by Todd, 06/29/02 Re:schizphrenic as failed mystic: again with feeling/missed my point, by Meditator, 06/30/02 The delicate balance of tolerant detachment, by Todd, 06/30/02 Re:The delicate balance of tolerant detachment, by Lindsay Smith, 07/04/02

| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |

Copyright © 1996-2004 Behavior OnLine, Inc. All rights reserved.