Labels such as “psycho” and “schizo” can be damaged.Here are alternative clinical terms | Health

It is common to hear people stigmatize such as “psycho”, “shizo”, “fully bipolar” and use discriminatory and harmful labels. Others may minimize the condition by saying that they are also “a little OCD” because they also value structure and organization. (Read again: 10 Simple Tips for Managing Mental Health).

Routine use of such pseudoclinical terms can be upset for adolescents suffering from these conditions. To make matters worse, it can stop them from seeking care.

Clinical terms can have the same effect.A recent study worked with young patients, caregivers, and clinicians to develop new patients. mental health Less stigma but accurate vocabulary.

Mental health labels have their strengths and weaknesses

Labels can provide a concise and easy-to-understand explanation of clinical and theoretical ideas. Diagnosis allows patients and medical professionals to follow evidence-based advice for effective care. This is because best practice guidelines are available for all labeled medical conditions.

In other words, naming the condition is the first step in identifying the best treatment available. Labels also help create a community of individuals who share similar clinical explanations and reassure individuals who are not alone.

Labels, on the other hand, can lead to prejudice and discrimination, lack of involvement in services, increased anxiety and suicidal ideation, and reduced mental health.

The process of making a diagnosis can treat an individual’s strengths or vulnerabilities as anomalous and make them morbid.

For example, a young person’s vibrant imagination and artistic motivation (a strength that makes it possible to produce great artwork) can be reviewed as a sign of illness. Alternatively, their experience of growing up in poverty and disadvantage may be seen as the cause of their mental illness, not just the environmental factors that may have contributed to it.

Therefore, clinicians should strive to understand human difficulties from a holistic, human, and psychological perspective before labeling.

New terminology, change of approach

Over the last decade, efforts have been made to improve the naming of mental illness. Attempts to update psychiatric terms and make them more culturally relevant and less blamed have resulted in schizophrenia renaming in some countries.

Proposed terms such as Si Jue Shi Tiao (thought and perception dysregulation) in Hong Kong and Johyenonbyung (attunement disorder) in South Korea have been proposed as alternatives that are less stigmatized and allow for a more positive view of psychiatry. increase.

However, these new terms were coined by experts in this field. Until now, we have rarely consulted with consumers or clients within our mental health system.

Thoughts from people who are “at risk”

Currently, “ultra-high risk (in the case of mental illness)”, “risk mental state” and “attenuated psychosis syndrome” are used to describe young people at high risk of developing psychosis. However, these labels can be stigmatized and damaging to the young people who receive them.

At Orygen, a new, less stigmatized way to explain the concept of “risk of mental illness” was co-developed with young people who have experienced mental illness.

In focus groups, ex-patients were asked how they would like their experience to be recalled if they were considered at risk of developing a mental illness.

As a result of this discussion, they have coined new terms such as “pre-diagnosis stage,” “potential for developing mental illness,” and “prone to develop mental illness.”

The term was then presented to three groups. Forty-six adolescents who have been identified as at risk for mental illness and are currently receiving care. Twenty-four of their caregivers; and 52 clinicians take care of the youth.

Most people thought these new terms were less stigmatized than the current ones. The new term was still judged to be informative and exemplifying the youth experience.

Patients also said they would like to fully disclose terms like these and raise them early in care. This revealed a desire for transparency when dealing with mental illness and clinicians.

The name has power

When the stigma is associated with the label, the label can and needs to be revisited.

Co-designing new diagnostic labels with patients, their caregivers, and clinicians can empower everyone involved. Several similar projects are underway in Italy and Japan to include a cultural perspective of renaming terms related to young people at risk of developing serious mental illness.

We want to integrate and use more terms generated by adolescents in mainstream early intervention psychiatric services. We hope this will have a significant impact on adolescents’ mental health by improving access to care and reducing stigma.

By Andrea Polari and Suzie Lavoie of the University of Melbourne