There’s a lot of preciousness about using ‘ordinary’ language about mental illness.
Journalists are regularly lobbied about words like ‘psycho’, ‘nutter’ etc
There’s a great article by Jo Brand, looking at the origin of some of these words and also at what some users/survivors think about them:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,2074299,00.html
I think that, like all language (spoken and perhaps especially non-verbal) it all depends on context, including who is using it. Not too many people flinch when I refer to myself as a lunatic. I think friends are rather relieved – that I’m relaxed enough to call myself this, and that they don’t need to be incredibly careful about how they talk about my illness. My psychiatrist/therapist sometimes responds to things I say with “Well, that’s just mad” and I enjoy the normality of the comment and it also makes a stronger impression than a technical interpretation might do. These are obviously contexts of trust and empathy.
While I wouldn’t warm to this sort of term being used with hostility, nor would I welcome any other terms! So if someone is trying to discredit me or something I say by referring to me being a ‘nutcase’, it wouldn’t really be any different to them saying “You would think that because you’ve got borderline personality disorder with accompanying dissociative states.”
Mainly, I like normal terms for madness because it makes me feel less stigmatised. (Not that I do feel stigmatised anyway…) People refer to themselves or others who aren’t mentally ill as ‘deranged’, ‘loopy’ etc. So they’re not just terms, or conditions, for those of us who have a diagnosed mental illness.
Unlike the service users in the article, I’m not anti-diagnosis. I’m anti excessive or inaccurate diagnosis, but as with all medical conditions, appropriate diagnosis can be essential in enabling us to understand what we’ve got, how we might have got it and, crucially, what we can do about it.
There are times, however, where the hostile use of common terms for madness is inexcusable. The best known example was The Sun’s front page ‘Bonkers Bruno’ headline when Frank Bruno was hospitalised. This prompted massive, hostile response from Bruno admirers and The Sun changed it in subsequent editions that day, apologised and carried out various other acts of penitence. The incident highlights some of the main features of unacceptable use of ordinary terms for madness, in addition to crude and hostile intent/impact:
1. being very public
2. attacking someone who at least in this context is vulnerable
3. the person has no immediate, equivalent way of responding/retaliating
4. the context of the comment, in this case an article, does nothing to undermine or challenge or prove the parody of the term
But in everyday, benign situations, I find it reassuring and humorous to be called barmy. Especially if the person using this term knows that I actually am.
What a brilliantly refreshing angle to take on the whole ‘mad’ thing. I think the over analysis about everday speech and phrases can be more stigmatising than if people just say things as they see them. Not in an offensive way, but speaking to people with mental illness as though you’re navigating some difficult mountain path rather iritates me. It’s like I better not crack a joke just in case I say the wrong thing, so lets just keep this very serious and sombre monotonal mode and we’ll be safe. Stick to the meaning of life and that way, I won’t put my foot in it. Anyway, I’m ranting a little and will stop! Nice blog though.
Hello brightplace,
Just a quick reminder that the Mind Bloggling Online Survey is back on line.
It can be found at:
http://www.mindbloggling.org.uk/-_online_survey_.htm
Or follow the ‘online survey’ link on the home page of the Mind Bloggling Website:
http://www.mindbloggling.org.uk
Please spread the word!
Thank You
Emma & Nat
hello,
i think that its a really good point that you’ve raised about language. generally my opinion of most words in any context is that its not what word is chosen that matters but why it has been chosen that does.
i find that some times ‘acceptable’ terminology shifts so rapidly that someone may be using a term in the good faith trying to be inoffencive but instead finds themselves causing offence.
i saw a programme on bbc a wee while ago talking about the origins of terms used in connection with mental ill health, which jo brand appeared on, thought it was really interesting and made me think around the concept. there was a group on there reclaiming terms such as ‘mad’ etc as a possitive thing, i think that although mental health is obviously a serious issue it is important to have a sense of humour, and the permission to speak freely about it at the same time. & on the whole i know many people who experienc mental ill health do just that.
in my opinion, generally people learn about things by talking to others and as with most things if people are afraid to talk about something, in fear of causing offence, be it religion, ethnicity, sexuality what ever the topic of choice may be misconceptions and stigma around that topic as a consequence thrives and expands.
thank you for making me think!
purkul
x
Hi Purkul
Thanks very much for this. I just wish I’d read your blog and Emma’s before I’d written mine as you express what I was trying to get at so much more clearly than I managed! Your point about it being why a word is chosen rather than what is chosen is spot on.
I had an email from a mate of mine, responding to an anxiety I had about the extent to which I’m coping with my mental illness, ‘normal life’ etc. It really made me laugh and feel calmer about the impact of my mental illness:
“You are as mad as a bucket of spanners, I could have told you that for nothing (I am DEFINITELY going to retrain as a psychiatrist now I see how easy peasy it is). However, you are overlooking a fundamental here…………everyone loves you precisely because you are as mad as a bucket of etc. Don’t sane up for crying out loud, you will end up BORING, like everyone else on the planet (myself included).
I insist that you remain mentally unwell for the amusement of your friends and acquaintances. Is that quite clear?”
As you say, context is pretty important with an email like this! I’d have been somewhat thrown if my GP had sent it!
Best wishes
marion
STICKS AND STONES!
This is an issue we look at often within our occupational therapy centre. How the use of certain words can have a harmful effect on individuals… we often do this through ART as it makes it more relaxed for group members.
We have recently displayed a large art project highlighting how ‘lables’ do effect people with mental health problems. My group members often tell me this is there biggest PROBLEM.
rOB
I often get incredulous looks when I refer to myself as a nutter. People don’t know how to react, especially when I do it on stage and then segue into a funny poem about wanting to put my head in the oven! Didn’t like the Bruno headline, but as you say he didn’t have a chance to retaliate and it was extremely public. My pet hate – and the politically correct label we wear, but I’m not sure how to pin it to my dress ‘cos my breast are big, but not this big – is the term ‘mental health service users.’ It’s horrible when you have to write about it, and put, oh sod it, I’m abbreviating, MHSU. Come on, give us something we can fit on the page!