
More than the name of the illness
What Nathan Filer says is that for someone who has schizophrenia, their illness is not the most important thing about them. That’s absolutely right, the problem with diagnoses like this, is that this comes to define the person and everything about them. Clearly it is significant, but does not govern everything about the person.
The effect of stigma
One of the problems about diagnosis is the potential stigmatising effects. Some people have a picture of someone with schizophrenia, perhaps that they’ve got from a sensationalising newspaper headline, and think everyone else is like that. For example, the campaigning clinical psychologist Rufus May says: “I’ve got a diagnosis, I’ve had a diagnosis, of schizophrenia. People stopped seeing Rufus, they started seeing ‘schizophrenia’.”
Helpful diagnosis
Interestingly, I read that in Japan the diagnostic term for schizophrenia has been changed from meaning a ‘split mind’ to ‘integration disorder’ to try and counter the stigma associated with it, and as a consequence the rate of diagnosis has gone up. Is that a good thing? Well clearly there are advantages to giving a name to a major mental health problem:
- It provides a guide to treatment – an accurate diagnosis helps inform clinicians as to what should be the best treatment and help for the person.
- It can help families – families often struggle to come to terms with mental health issues, having an explanation can be reassuring, and be a source of education and information about coping strategies.
- It can be a key to accessing services – having a diagnosis can help in securing access to specialist services in mental health teams such as crisis services.
David Beckingham – QCS Expert Mental Health Contributor