Stigma in the Name

            If you had a headache, would you like to be called an “acher” or simply a person with a headache?  When you are referred to as an “acher,” then this ache defines you.  The ache is who you are.  When you are referred to as the person who has a headache, then you are not defined by it.  It is simply something you have—you might suffer through this seldom or more often, but it clearly does not define you. 

            I must admit that this example I just gave is preposterous, even hilarious.  Who would ever think of calling oneself or another person an “acher,” (Is there even such a word?) just because that person had a physical ache of some sort.  I guess I wanted to show how parallel this example can be to what we frequently do with the diagnoses of many illnesses, not the least of which are mental illnesses.  For example, we often call a person who has Diabetes to be Diabetic.  As far a mental illnesses are concerned, there are more examples, such as, “manic” for those who are in a state of mania, “depressed” and “anxious” for those suffering from clinical depression or anxiety disorders, “phobic” for those with unusual fears, “schizophrenic” for those who have schizophrenia, etc.  The list goes on. 

            Although more cumbersome, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders (DSM, the American diagnostic manual used in diagnosing mental illnesses) recommends that we refer to persons as having this or that mental illness rather than making the diagnosis identify them.  On one hand, it is just a politically correct and accurate way of stating the condition of the person.  On the other, it de-stigmatizes the person and detaches them from their diagnosis.  They simply have this illness, rather than the illness being who they are. 

            This practice of saying that a person has a certain condition or illness can also be liberating.  It helps the person think of themselves as being greater than what it is they have.  It also helps others to see that these people who have this or that condition or illness have other characteristics and traits that make them persons, and not simply a category in one’s minds.  And so, it is a perspective that offers further consideration and a potential for further growth.   

            In many everyday conversations, many of us are guilty of poking fun and trivializing people who may have a condition or mental illness.  Perhaps this is a response to the awkward and ignorant fear of the reality of mental illness in our midst.  It could also be a way of distancing this reality from our own experience, a way of denying that such a condition can befall us too.  We call such people by many names, names that we ourselves would never approve of being used on us.  And yet, many mental illnesses are treatable, just like many illnesses are.  This makes identifying the person to be that illness rather inaccurate and useless. 

            The stigma of mental illness is perpetuated by our own lack of understanding.  If we can only begin by referring to people to have such and such condition or mental illness, rather than identifying that person to be that illness, then maybe we can lessen the stigma of these conditions or mental illnesses.