I had a surprise recently when in a company meeting regarding a depressed client, a fellow co-worker volunteered to us that he had a history of depression and actively sought treatment through a psychiatrist. In the past, a person with mental health problems faced some serious problems in contemporary society. Admitting to seeing a psychiatrist would've cost you your job, reputation, and social network in some circles. People admit going to the doctor for knee or back problems, but very few people bring up in casual conversation even today that they see a "shrink" for their bi-polar disorder. We have also seen the rise of anti-depressant drugs in the forefront of society-namely, on the t.v. in the form of advertisements. This topic is relevant politically in that we are now seeing a record number of individuals and students in schools who are receiving medication. We've also seen the publishing of studies regarding depressants and adolescent use, the effectiveness of anger management treatment, as well as a fascination with therapy through the popularity of the likes of Dr. Phil and Dr. Laura.



Questions for debate:
1.)Have atittudes regarding problems with mental health truly changed for the better?

2.)Has our culture become too accepting of therapy-i.e., the therapuetic culture of labeling anything and everything an addiction? Have we gone too far in accepting the "addiction"itis of every and any individual problems?

3.)Do you consider psychotherapy to be effective in your opinon?

4.)Would you vote for a candidate at any level if they disclosed that in the past, they have sought therapy?

5.)Would you hire someone who has had mental health treatment?

An estimated 19 million American adults are living with major depression. WebMd

1.)Have atittudes regarding problems with mental health truly changed for the better?

I believe they have…to a point. The old attitudes about depression were similar to how alcoholism was perceived before it was announced that it was a disease. Popular belief was that it was a moral weakness, and you should just “snap out of it”. Some people still think that depression isn’t a valid condition. Having said that, I also believe there is a time and a place to spill your guts, and the workplace isn’t one of them unless your problem or treatment has a direct bearing on your performance or your co-workers.

2.)Has our culture become too accepting of therapy-i.e., the therapeutic culture of labeling anything and everything an addiction? Have we gone too far in accepting the "addiction"itis of every and any individual problems?

You can't lump everything into the "addiction" category. There are many mental health conditions that are not addictions, such as depression. And besides, it’s better than the way it was. For example, PTSD wasn’t recognized until fairly recently. Soldiers were diagnosed as having “shell shock (WWI) or “combat fatigue” (WWII), and the prevailing attitude was to regard them as cowards, unwilling to put their lives at risk when danger was at hand. Can you imagine people treating our soldiers like that today? People with mental illnesses that we now understand and treat used to be doomed to “insane asylums” or “lunatic asylums”, which were little more than warehouses for storing damaged human beings. However, I do think the medical profession is a little too carefree with diagnosing children with mental conditions. When I was little, acting out and hyperactivity was called “being a kid.”

3.)Do you consider psychotherapy to be effective in your opinon?

I think it depends on the individual, and the quality of the therapist. There are far too many variables to give a yes or no answer on this one. What is wrong with seeking help for a problem? I think it takes a lot of guts for a person to recognize something in him/herself that is not quite right. I think everyone can benefit from learning more about their condition, to better understand what is happening in order to deal with it more effectively. Then there are those therapists I abhor-the ones who convince the patient that all their problems were created by someone else (i.e. mom and dad). I came from a family who put the fun in dysfunctional, but I don’t blame every problem in my life on them.

4.)Would you vote for a candidate at any level if they disclosed that in the past, they have sought therapy?

Depends what they were being treated for! If he was a pychopath, a sociopath or a schizophrenic, I don’t think so.

5.)Would you hire someone who has had mental health treatment?
I would hope so, as I suffer from clinical depression myself. It makes me no less effective at my job. Now that I take medication, the crazy mood swings have evened out, and I’m even a likable cuss most of the time! But, since it is not a legal question to ask in an interview, I don’t think it would be a factor anyway (unless, of course, the person had been institutionalized or something).

1.)Have attitudes regarding problems with mental health truly changed for the better?

I don't know...to some degree I think so - more people admit they've been to therapy for a host of reasons (not all of which as a result of some form of mental illness), it becomes more accepted. But, I think at the same time, with more "cases" of mental illness being reported/diagnosed, people are probably more suspicious (it's over-diagnosed, etc.). I think, overall, the general population's outlook on mental health problems has made positive strides.

2.)Has our culture become too accepting of therapy-i.e., the therapeutic culture of labeling anything and everything an addiction? Have we gone too far in accepting the "addiction"itis of every and any individual problems?

I think this ties in to what I was saying previously. I think a lot of people (typically from cultures who aren't prone to seeking outside help for mental health or family-level problems) think we're making excuses and are constantly coming up with new disorders to accommodate and any everything under the sun. I have been diagnosed (as an adult) with ADHD, which is termed a mental health disorder. I have spoken to a number of people (both friends and extended family) who are pretty suspicious of many mental health claims as of late (particularly because it seems they are used as a defense in trials every time you open the newspaper) and probably, secretly, think I really don't have a problem other than just being a lazy slob. From my research, I know ADHD is very real (and from my own personal experiences in my lifetime of dealing with the problems that I never knew were associated with any real disorder), but I do understand how some might find it part of the "addictionitis" (nice term ) trend we seem to be moving toward.

3.)Do you consider psychotherapy to be effective in your opinon?

It can only be effective if you want it to be, in my opinion - and it's probably not for everyone. I have only been to two sessions thus far (one about ADHD and diagnosis, the other tapping into PTSD I suffered with the death of my grandfather - something I never even realized was as bad as it was until my mom and I started talking about ADHD and my past) and I can already tell that it has helped me quite a bit. But just as all people have different problems, there must be different solutions to the problems that take into consideration the individual's receptiveness to different "therapies" (or lack thereof).

4.)Would you vote for a candidate at any level if they disclosed that in the past, they have sought therapy?

As DaffyGrl stated, it would largely depend upon the reasons for seeking therapy - certain very serious conditions would probably not be conducive to holding an elected office. But I would actually probably think of it as a positive if something with a problem sought help for it...I think it's better for someone to look at all sorts of options than to live in denial!

5.)Would you hire someone who has had mental health treatment?

Well, many mental health problems are protected under the Americans With Disabilities Act (and under Affirmative Action as a result), so that would obviously play a role in that decision. But I'd like to think I'd be willing to hire a person with a mental illness! We all have problems and the people who are getting help for their problems are probably less "dangerous" in terms of work environment than those who aren't. Again, very serious conditions aside, I think it would be absurd NOT to hire someone with a mental health problem, unless said problem has some sort of direct impact upon his/her ability to perform the required job.

Have atittudes regarding problems with mental health truly changed for the better?

Unquestionably. Time has produced an extensive number of mental health disorders and treatments, and while our doctor's may be a bit quick in prescribing medication, it beats the "asylum culture" that existed in the past. There's a reason that mental health asylums are a common theme in horror flicks.

The transfer to community healthcare in the beginning of the 20th century was a huge step forward, but even at that stage patients could look forward to some rather gruesome therapies such as electroshock, insulin shock therapy, hydrotherapy, and the lobotomy, and many of these treatments were used on people who suffered from the diseases that we would now refer to as clinical depression, bi-polar disorder, anxiety disorder, etc.

There's a great article on this: 20th Century History of the Treatment of Mental illness.

Has our culture become too accepting of therapy-i.e., the therapuetic culture of labeling anything and everything an addiction? Have we gone too far in accepting the "addiction"itis of every and any individual problems?

No. I would rather see people trying to deal with their problems through therapy and labels than trying to exorcise the evil spirits or shock the anxiety away. Sometimes it's overdone and is used as an excuse for not taking personal responsibility, and I think that's unfortunate, but there are legitimate cases and legitimate treatments, and if we're doing a comparison of the past and present, I'll take the present.

Do you consider psychotherapy to be effective in your opinon?

It depends upon the problem and the person. I don't really think there's an effective way to answer this question.

Would you vote for a candidate at any level if they disclosed that in the past, they have sought therapy?

Certainly. Everyone is effected negatively by the human condition at some point, and therapy and medication can often help. I'm not going to damn someone just because they sought treatment for a condition that had a negative impact on their lives whether it be physical or emotional. I'm going to judge that person on their current ability to do the job.

Would you hire someone who has had mental health treatment?

My answer on this is the same as above.

Questions for debate:
1.)Have atittudes regarding problems with mental health truly changed for the better?

Overall, yes. I think science has helped us out in understanding many of these conditions better and allowed for alternative explanations for a persons behavior.

2.)Has our culture become too accepting of therapy-i.e., the therapuetic culture of labeling anything and everything an addiction? Have we gone too far in accepting the "addiction"itis of every and any individual problems?

I think we teeter on the edge of this at times. Post Traumatic Slave Disorder is a good example of it. I think there is a fine line to be walked between understanding psychological ailments and accepting personal responsibility.

3.)Do you consider psychotherapy to be effective in your opinon?

Generally, yes. Exceptions abound, but I think people can genuinely gain insight into how their past shaped their decisions and reconcile them.

4.)Would you vote for a candidate at any level if they disclosed that in the past, they have sought therapy?

As long as he or she isn't medicated currently, sure. Lucidity should be a requirement for public office, even if some of our current representatives seem to have grandfathered in on that one.

5.)Would you hire someone who has had mental health treatment?

Sure. Difficult to say though as medical history I don't believe is a legal inquiry except where physical demands of the job may require certain levels of activity. Would we be allowed to put on the application "This job has high levels of stress, are you currently on any medication or psychotherapy that would worsen this effect?"

Doc

Wow- basically the questions from society I have heard for the last 17 years I have worked in the only state/fed/muni state-run mental health facility in Alaska. We have: a geriatric unit, a forensic unit, an adolecent unit, an admitting/screening unit and a an acute care/chronic care unit. I currently work the forensic unit, and have for about 10 of my 17 years.


1.)Have atittudes regarding problems with mental health truly changed for the better?

Treatment has become better, for specific mental illnesses, the average layman that has no contact with the mental health system really still has no clue about 90% of what I do, or the variety of mental illness and it's variety of impacts.

Even advocacy groups have alot of misconceptions about mental illnesses.

First off, you have to seperate organic mental illness vs personality disorders vs forensic behaviors (criminal behavior)

Schizophrenia, depression, bi-polar, huntingtons corea etc etc are all chemical disorders of some kind, an imbalance, basically a disease that affects the brain as opposed to say, diabetes, where another organ is the primary poor functioning unit.

However, personality disorders such as borderline personality disorder etc are an entirely different thing!

Here is the thing: you drop off a schizophrenic on a desert island with no other humans, chances are you would see the same behaviors on that island as opposed to in "open" society. Drop off a personality disorder on the desert island with no one around, you will not see any negative behaviors, because there is no audience for them.

So, to even lump mental illness into a large category in our brain of "mental illness" it to not understand the scope of what you are saying LOL


2.)Has our culture become too accepting of therapy-i.e., the therapuetic culture of labeling anything and everything an addiction? Have we gone too far in accepting the "addiction"itis of every and any individual problems?

We are too embracing of the "illnes de jou"- I think one of the most hienous is the "recovered memory" fad a while back, and the multiple personality disorder is HUGELY misunderstood, and almost never exists as portrayed by the media or pop psychology - and also don't understand what 99.999999% of every popular media exposure of someone claims as a "mulitple disorder disorder" are highly predatory con men/women.


3.)Do you consider psychotherapy to be effective in your opinon?

100% dependent on the diagnosis and the behavior leading to the diagnosis, To broad a question!

4.)Would you vote for a candidate at any level if they disclosed that in the past, they have sought therapy?

Tough one- something like chronic depression- probably if they have a history of competent behavior towards the discharge of thier duties. Alot of over-achievers have chronic depression, it is part of what drives them.

I would never hire a person with a hard core axis 2 diagnosis.


5.)Would you hire someone who has had mental health treatment?

Same as above.

Very interesting responses thus far. Just to add some logs to the fire. BBC news recently had an article on the effectiveness of mental health therapy in treating Ugandan AIDS patients and found the following:



On the other hand, you have groups like scientologists who view psychology in general, as a fraud.


(From the above hyperlink)

Any thoughts?

I don't understand this line of thinking at all. This sounds like another situation where science and spirituality are at odds with one another, because some of those on the spiritual side are afraid that science will render their beliefs obsolete. In this case, it is by proving that emotion is a product of chemical processes as opposed to being a product of the human spirit.

I'm not sure why these beliefs have to be at odds, but I would ask: Does the idea that chemical processes influence our emotions somehow lessen the impact of the emotion? Isn't "spiritual well-being" or "peace of mind" just as important if the emotion doesn't come from some ethereal space?