Re: “Review policies on mental illness,” editorial, Nov. 5.
Before we review policies on mental illness, we better be sure we know what we mean when we label someone “mentally ill.”
Where’s the science behind the label? How do we know someone is mentally ill? What are the circumstances that strongly indicate severe mental illness? Do we subject them to various tests and lab analysis in order to find a causative agent for their so-called illness?
Decades of research tells us that’s not possible. The chemical-imbalance theory has been thoroughly debunked, and no obvious pathogens exist. There is no biological cause for emotional distress, depression or the failure to cope with the life-changing events — threats of abandonment, physical and sexual abuse, poverty or debilitation by legitimate illness — that every person might encounter.
While there are a host of legitimate reasons why someone suffering severe emotional distress becomes a threat to themselves or others, labelling them “mentally ill” isn’t helpful. In fact, living with the stigma attached to the label can present a major obstacle to overcoming their distress.
Yes, we should review what we are doing for those dealing with severe emotional distress. The first thing we can do is stop pretending they are suffering from a mental illness. Doing so simply passes the buck, making it strictly a medical problem instead of a social, economic and cultural problem.
But, more important, we also need to review the political decision-making that chooses to underfund those institutions that seek to provide a “safe, secure and supportive environment.”
Ken Dwernychuk
Saanich
