There have been a number of people over the years for whom I have thought, "things would just be better for you if you took antidepressants" or "you're just doing such and such because you're a little crazy." I no longer these things for the most part. My own struggles have really changed how I think about being so-called crazy. These sorts of comments are dismissive and too simplistic.
But since my thinking on these matters has changed, I frequently find myself frustrated with people who don't understand what it means to struggle--either with a poor mental state or with some physical ailment. Struggle creates an ability to empathize even with people who have vastly different experiences, I believe. This ability to empathize is clearly lacking in some.
For example, a few weeks ago, I encountered someone who said that this other person she knew just needed to take his anti-psychotics again. There didn't seem to be any exploration of why this person stopped taking them or what the effects were of taking them long-term. Even if they worked wonders for this guy, there may have been a number of reasons to not continue.
More recently, I was talking a friend about a mutual friend who is a bit eccentric. This acquaintance seemed to think that this friend was a combination of naive, crazy, and lonely. The eccentric behaviors were seen as a means of attention getting.
Since I used to make such comments, I understand where they're coming from. I assumed that modern pyschiatric medications worked long-term with relatively few side-effects and that a decision to stop taking or not take them was symptomatic of the underlying psychiatric condition. I also saw no reason previously not to behave "normally," so behaving outside of the norms was obviously the result of illogical thinking. So many assumptions with so little data!
It's very easy to be dismissive of people thought to be mentally ill, regardless of whether they are ill, because any behavior that is considered abnormal is attributed to the mental illness. This has been shown to be the case on a clinical level: A lot of the emotional side effects of antidepressants and discontinuing them were initially attributed to the underlying illness. It was only when these medications were given to "normal" people that they realized the side effects were real.
But it's also certainly true on a social level. Most people don't really want to get inside the heads of those who are thought to be mentally ill, because of course their thinking is pathological! Understanding their thought process won't accomplish anything. Best to just tell them what to do since you're thinking is clear and theirs isn't.
The reality is, I think, that many formerly or currently mentally "ill" people have a lot of insight. Obviously, this depends on the "illness" and severity. But in my experience, people who have struggled with their emotional state have more compassion and empathy for others who are struggling. They understand what it means to struggle and that there aren't simple answers. And of course, having struggled with your mental state, doesn't mean that you're not self-aware. You're capable of knowing what helps you and what doesn't and what to do when you're having a rough time. Just because your thinking isn't productive or clear 100% of the time, doesn't mean that you're not qualified to help yourself. In fact, you are the most qualified to help yourself because you're the best acquainted with your issues.
I wonder about these people who are dismissive of "crazy" people. I find it hard to believe that they have never legitimately struggled with their mental state in their lives. I'm sure that they have at one point or another. I don't want to make the same mistake of over simplifying them and their position. But I wonder, do they just conceptualize their struggles as simply situational? Or perhaps the severity or the length of the struggle wasn't great enough or long enough to revise their thinking. Or perhaps calling other people crazy is a defense mechanism. Who knows? Regardless, I don't think they've thought particularly clearly about what it means or what it's like to be mentally "ill." They're certainly not approaching mental "illness" with a lot of compassion.
But since my thinking on these matters has changed, I frequently find myself frustrated with people who don't understand what it means to struggle--either with a poor mental state or with some physical ailment. Struggle creates an ability to empathize even with people who have vastly different experiences, I believe. This ability to empathize is clearly lacking in some.
For example, a few weeks ago, I encountered someone who said that this other person she knew just needed to take his anti-psychotics again. There didn't seem to be any exploration of why this person stopped taking them or what the effects were of taking them long-term. Even if they worked wonders for this guy, there may have been a number of reasons to not continue.
More recently, I was talking a friend about a mutual friend who is a bit eccentric. This acquaintance seemed to think that this friend was a combination of naive, crazy, and lonely. The eccentric behaviors were seen as a means of attention getting.
Since I used to make such comments, I understand where they're coming from. I assumed that modern pyschiatric medications worked long-term with relatively few side-effects and that a decision to stop taking or not take them was symptomatic of the underlying psychiatric condition. I also saw no reason previously not to behave "normally," so behaving outside of the norms was obviously the result of illogical thinking. So many assumptions with so little data!
It's very easy to be dismissive of people thought to be mentally ill, regardless of whether they are ill, because any behavior that is considered abnormal is attributed to the mental illness. This has been shown to be the case on a clinical level: A lot of the emotional side effects of antidepressants and discontinuing them were initially attributed to the underlying illness. It was only when these medications were given to "normal" people that they realized the side effects were real.
But it's also certainly true on a social level. Most people don't really want to get inside the heads of those who are thought to be mentally ill, because of course their thinking is pathological! Understanding their thought process won't accomplish anything. Best to just tell them what to do since you're thinking is clear and theirs isn't.
The reality is, I think, that many formerly or currently mentally "ill" people have a lot of insight. Obviously, this depends on the "illness" and severity. But in my experience, people who have struggled with their emotional state have more compassion and empathy for others who are struggling. They understand what it means to struggle and that there aren't simple answers. And of course, having struggled with your mental state, doesn't mean that you're not self-aware. You're capable of knowing what helps you and what doesn't and what to do when you're having a rough time. Just because your thinking isn't productive or clear 100% of the time, doesn't mean that you're not qualified to help yourself. In fact, you are the most qualified to help yourself because you're the best acquainted with your issues.
I wonder about these people who are dismissive of "crazy" people. I find it hard to believe that they have never legitimately struggled with their mental state in their lives. I'm sure that they have at one point or another. I don't want to make the same mistake of over simplifying them and their position. But I wonder, do they just conceptualize their struggles as simply situational? Or perhaps the severity or the length of the struggle wasn't great enough or long enough to revise their thinking. Or perhaps calling other people crazy is a defense mechanism. Who knows? Regardless, I don't think they've thought particularly clearly about what it means or what it's like to be mentally "ill." They're certainly not approaching mental "illness" with a lot of compassion.
No comments:
Post a Comment