Serious? Complex? Severe?

Forgive me, I think this is a really interesting thread but we seem to be talking about several different things:

A term to use to attract people to the site (those who are experiencing MH issues for the first time as well as those who have dealt with them for prolonged periods), terms to use to employers and co-workers, to friends, to the wider public and to each other.

I'm not sure that you could ever come up with two or three words that capture all facets of all forms of mental ill-health. Surely it's okay to use different words with different people, in different situations.

In terms of the original post, maybe the mods could clarify what they're wanting to achieve with the term they select.... but it's a great conversation to have, in any case 🙂

Hi ther @Former-Member

I like topics that are a bit open, that don't need strict definition. The idea is to find out, if I am not mistakes, how we respond to the terms chronic, serious and severe Mental Illnes.

What we write here is how we respond. In addition, I feel that any mental disorder is such a difficult thing to talk about that it is best not to have any rigid definition otherwise we run the risk of doing what academics do and that is to define what canot be defined (for example consciousness: is it in the mind or outside of the mind? We don't KNOW!)

The other point I am trying to make, and of course I am a sufferer not an expert, is that any word that contains the term Illness is a problem in terms of stigma. Any word that leads to an illness such as chronic, serious and severe, is a problem for stigma.

I think that it is important to remember that STIGMA is the greatest enemy that keeps us unwell. That IS the number one enemy 🙂

(QUOTE @Former-Member Wrote: "We're focusing our work both in the Help Centre & throughout the wider organisation towards the more serious end of the mental health/illness continuum......where anxiety and depression become chronic and undermine our quality of life. Where a diagnosis of bi-polar, a personality disorder, schizophrenia and more can quite radically change the course of our lives.

Now we're working on a elevator pitch of sorts where we need to be able to quite succinctly describe the organisation, it's aims and services. We'd love to get a feel for how Forum members react to the following terms:-

severe mental illness

complex mental illness

serious mental illness" (end of quote).

Hi @Former-Member

Just to verify a point - is the organisation SANE a support group for those whom suffer the more serious end of mental health illnesses only? The above labels would deter those who suffer from mild to chronic anxiety/depression and possible suicide ideation as one does not have to have a serious mental health issue to suffer debilating chronic anxiety/depression that does undermine their quality of life. People can be experiencing abuse, bullying, financial hardship, loss, divorce, grief, chronic isolation/loneliness, psychological scars from childhood, physical disorders, leant behaviours, traumas, physical illness that produces chronic anxiety/depression, victims of violence or witnessing, abandonment, unemployment etc and basically not coping with life that results in ongoing chronic anxiety/depression without a Diagnosis of serious mental illness. This huge majority would fall between the cracks and not receive help as they would not fall into that category or see themselves in that category. Or would not want to be identified and labelled as "mental". This would more than likely result in people developing long term serious mental illness as they are not receiving the support they can identify with and need.

In my personal opinion it would be more productive towards enhancing the mental well being across society reducing the incidence of suicide if SANE could incorporate a much wider bracket of mental health issues. Stating itself as an organisation actively preventing the national suicide epidemic by offering support to all those who are suffering mild to chronic and complex "mental anguish" due to mild to chronic depression/anxiety/trauma/distress resulting from life's adversities (and sub categorise them i.e. social anxiety, loss, terminal illness, unemployment, lonliness, abuse, childhood trauma, DV, diseas, relationship problems, disease, bullying, disease and so on...); incorporating more serious complex biological/psychological mental illness (categorising schizophrenia, bi-polar, PTSD, personality disorder and so on).

When I had my major breakdown which was triggered/created by loss, grief, menopausal depression/anxiety, past and present trauma that created a brain chemical imbalance, DV (by offspring) which resulted in a suicide attempt - I would not have felt I fitted in any of the three above categories.

Thank you for the opportunity to have an input.

Sorry for the very lengthy paragraphs and the repeating of some words in above post. My computer is playing up due to a suspected virus and is freezing (can't edit).

---

@OverTheEdge wrote:

(QUOTE @Former-Member Wrote: "We're focusing our work both in the Help Centre & throughout the wider organisation towards the more serious end of the mental health/illness continuum......where anxiety and depression become chronic and undermine our quality of life. Where a diagnosis of bi-polar, a personality disorder, schizophrenia and more can quite radically change the course of our lives.

Now we're working on a elevator pitch of sorts where we need to be able to quite succinctly describe the organisation, it's aims and services. We'd love to get a feel for how Forum members react to the following terms:-

severe mental illness

complex mental illness

serious mental illness" (end of quote).

Hi @Former-Member

Just to verify a point - is the organisation SANE a support group for those whom suffer the more serious end of mental health illnesses only? The above labels would deter those who suffer from mild to chronic anxiety/depression and possible suicide ideation as one does not have to have a serious mental health issue to suffer debilating chronic anxiety/depression that does undermine their quality of life. People can be experiencing abuse, bullying, financial hardship, loss, divorce, grief, chronic isolation/loneliness, psychological scars from childhood, physical disorders, leant behaviours, traumas, physical illness that produces chronic anxiety/depression, victims of violence or witnessing, abandonment, unemployment etc and basically not coping with life that results in ongoing chronic anxiety/depression without a Diagnosis of serious mental illness. This huge majority would fall between the cracks and not receive help as they would not fall into that category or see themselves in that category. Or would not want to be identified and labelled as "mental". This would more than likely result in people developing long term serious mental illness as they are not receiving the support they can identify with and need.

In my personal opinion it would be more productive towards enhancing the mental well being across society reducing the incidence of suicide if SANE could incorporate a much wider bracket of mental health issues. Stating itself as an organisation actively preventing the national suicide epidemic by offering support to all those who are suffering mild to chronic and complex "mental anguish" due to mild to chronic depression/anxiety/trauma/distress resulting from life's adversities (and sub categorise them i.e. social anxiety, loss, terminal illness, unemployment, lonliness, abuse, childhood trauma, DV, diseas, relationship problems, disease, bullying, disease and so on...); incorporating more serious complex biological/psychological mental illness (categorising schizophrenia, bi-polar, PTSD, personality disorder and so on).

When I had my major breakdown which was triggered/created by loss, grief, menopausal depression/anxiety, past and present trauma that created a brain chemical imbalance, DV (by offspring) which resulted in a suicide attempt - I would not have felt I fitted in any of the three above categories.

Thank you for the opportunity to have an input.

---

---

@Sehnsucht wrote:
@theaveragejoe,

So I'm not sure neurodiverse will tackle stigma. It doesn't challenge anyone's prejudice. It just side-steps it.

---

Exactly. Euphemisms are generally never particularly helpful.

It's illness. I didn't feel 'neurodiverse' when manic/depressed/suicidial/psychotic. I felt just plain old sick.

---

@OverTheEdge wrote:

---

Hi @Former-Member

In my personal opinion it would be more productive towards enhancing the mental well being across society reducing the incidence of suicide if SANE could incorporate a much wider bracket of mental health issues

---

The problem here is that with any of the illnesses @Former-Member's mentioned when you look at any of the literature the life outcomes are far far far worse than for the more moderate episodes of depression/anxiety. And this is on any metric, suicide rate, life expectancy, life outcomes (jobs, social status). I fully support SANE's course of action. There are many mental health organisations and they do not need to be all doing the same thing. There are some big name organisations out there focusing on the issues you've raised. I like this move by SANE.

I agree with what you say, @Former-Member, since it is impossible to say how serious a mental disorder is for the person that suffers it, since even a mild anxiety can lead to suicide, it makes sense to treat mental disorders in terms of how the person copes with their disorder. Clearly it is all about coping skills and every mental disorder, even what we would mistakenly classify as mild, can lead to serious problems. That is why I said is how we travel in our head not just how serious our disorder is.

This tends to negate any sort of scale from low to middle to high severity. Indeed, how do we measure the severity of Mental Disorders? We can't, it is all relative to many other things.

That is why, I feel, it is best to try not to use words that can be picked up by society at large and used as psychological weapons against us.

I have interviwed a few employers (in various locations of NSW), for personal research and satisfaction. 98% said that they would be more inclined to employ people that are defined as neurodiverse, rather than people that are defined as having a Mental Illness. When I asked why I was told that, psychologically, the term "illness" just does something to employers and stops them from hiring the person.

J

mrkotter wrote:

OverTheEdge wrote:

Hi @suzanne

In my personal opinion it would be more productive towards enhancing the mental well being across society reducing the incidence of suicide if SANE could incorporate a much wider bracket of mental health issues

The problem here is that with any of the illnesses @suzanne's mentioned when you look at any of the literature the life outcomes are far far far worse than for the more moderate episodes of depression/anxiety. And this is on any metric, suicide rate, life expectancy, life outcomes (jobs, social status). I fully support SANE's course of action. There are many mental health organisations and they do not need to be all doing the same thing. There are some big name organisations out there focusing on the issues you've raised. I like this move by SANE.

Hi @mrkotter

I think you missed what I was saying. Major (not moderate) depression and chronic anxiety that is debilitating undermining quality of life accompanying suicide ideation does not always incorporate a diagnosis of serious mental illness.

i.e. the highest suicide rate in Australian society is in the elderly age bracket - major depression triggered by factors such as loss, grief, lonlines, loss of productivity, health etc - but not due to serious mental illness. That's one example - majority of those suffering chronic anxiety and mild to severe "depression" for a multiple of reasons whom are just as "high a suicide risk" would fall through the cracks of the red tape of "not fitting into any of the three categories proposed". Why disadvantage them risking the lives of countless through exclusivity. To me that is not in the spirit of a mental health forum whose aim is to lower the national suicide epidemic. Suicide does not discriminate or belong to exclusive groups - it's a widespread dilemma.

A few thoughts:

I understand the dilemna of accepting the way we are as .. an illness or aberration. I am not sure its the best, most effective way to conceptualise our issues. It seems to be based on the pragmatism of fitting into a medical model and system.

I really like the simplicity of SANE's title and the positivity and generality implied by it. Though I am not into euphemisms, our language is important and often can reinforce doubt and struggles or the flipside of personal strengths.

Personally I dont find "chronic" a good word. It doesnt imply management of a situation to me, just longevity. I wrote the words "chronic paranoid schizophrenic" and then tried to unpack what it meant when told my father's diagnosis,10 years after he died. I would prefer "long term".

The emerging field of epigenetics .. seems more important to a phenomenolgy of mental illness than to simple causes. The "its genetic: argument helped reduce some of the blame on parents and care-givers, which is good, but dumbing down of genetics may have lead to misinformation about the causes of traits and inheritance.

I like the flawed pot story. It is usually the illusion of perfection in being human that causes a lot of denial and misunderstanding. People are far more complicated than pots.