Mental Health America joins Americans in mourning the loss of those killed in Saturday’s tragic and senseless attack and expressing our wishes for the full recovery of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and fellow citizens who were injured. Our thoughts and prayers are with the families and loved ones of those who lost their lives and everyone who is affected by these horrific events. And we join in applauding the brave actions of individuals who prevented greater harm.
It will likely take many days to understand the reasons and motivations behind this national tragedy. Many have pointed to mental health as an issue.
It must first be emphasized that people with mental health conditions are no more likely to be violent than the rest of the population. And we have science-based methods to successfully treat persons with even the most severe mental illnesses. A very small group of individuals with a specific type of mental health symptoms are at greater risk for violence if their symptoms are untreated.
At the same time, we must recognize that the nation’s mental health system is drastically under-funded and fails to provide Americans living with mental health conditions with the effective community-based mental health services they need. Sadly, in the current environment of strained state budgets, mental health services have been cut drastically just as demand for these critical services has risen dramatically.
It is also important that, as a community, we assist persons with signs and symptoms of mental illnesses to seek treatment. Although rare, when a person becomes so ill that he/she is a danger to themselves or others state laws provide a way to get them help even if they don’t believe that they need it. The best strategy, however, is to have an accessible system of care that is easy to use.
Science has not developed tools to predict reliably individuals at risk for violence. But we can reduce the small risk of violence in those with certain mental health conditions by investing in proven intensive, coordinated community-based mental health services and making certain that they can access these services.
We do not know if the mental health system failed in this situation or if there were missed opportunities or if effective treatment might have averted this tragedy.
We do hope that we can find answers and create solutions that prevent this from ever happening again.
Mental Health America (www.mentalhealthamerica.net) is the country's leading nonprofit dedicated to helping all people live mentally healthier lives. With our century of service to America and our more than 300 affiliates nationwide, we represent a national movement that promotes mental wellness for the health and well-being of the nation— everyday and in times of crisis.
Monday, January 10, 2011
Tuesday, December 28, 2010
Families worry mental health cuts will send kids spiraling
By Victoria Kim, Los Angeles Times
A week before Christmas, Judy Powelson was awaiting her son's first visit home in nine months with a mix of excitement and trepidation.
Earlier in the year, the 17-year-old's mental illness had spiraled out of control to the point that he attacked her, kicked a teacher in the groin and was hospitalized for psychiatric treatment. But since he entered residential treatment funded in part by the state, she'd seen him go through marked improvements — getting a 3.11 GPA and being voted MVP in soccer.
Now Powelson's son, identified in court papers as T.G., is one of 20,000 students across California whose mental health services may be in jeopardy in the new year because of a line-item veto by the governor. In October, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger slashed $133 million in funding for what are known as AB 3632 services, a 25-year-old program that requires state and local education and mental health agencies to jointly provide education-related mental health services.
Save Up to 90%: Sign up for our free daily e-mail to get in on exclusive deals around L.A. Powered by Groupon. Subscribe Now.
Families with children who suffer from mental illnesses ranging from depression to schizophrenia and who depend on these services have been thrown into chaos, parents and advocates say. Several counties, including Orange and Alameda, have sent out notices indicating that the services will be discontinued in January, attorneys representing the parents said.
"If my son loses this treatment, I will lose my son," Powelson said, her voice quivering. "I will lose him to mental illness, I will lose him to the criminal justice system, to drug abuse, to suicide."
She has filed a declaration about her son's situation as part of a federal class-action lawsuit seeking to block cutbacks to or discontinuation of the services. This month, a federal judge in Los Angeles heard arguments from attorneys representing the families and various state and local agencies but said he would wait until the new year before considering whether to issue an injunction.
U.S. District Judge George Wu said it wasn't immediately clear what would happen come Jan. 14, when a temporary order restoring the funding for the services is due to expire. He said he also wanted to wait for the outcome of a separate state court case in Sacramento challenging the governor's veto, which is scheduled to be heard in early January.
"I understand that the state agencies are pointing the finger and saying, 'It's your problem, it's your problem, it's your problem,' " Wu said at the hearing, adding that each agency was "waiting for somebody to blink." But he said it wasn't the right time for him to issue an order because "it's a complicated situation.... Bad things have not happened, but may happen in the future based on how these agencies act."
Attorneys representing various state and county agencies said they were trying to determine where the funds would come from, not dodging their responsibilities. They also said the four named plaintiffs in the case were currently receiving the necessary treatment and had not been notified that it would be taken away.
"They're here prematurely," said Supervising Deputy Atty. Gen. Jennifer M. Kim, representing the governor's office and the California Department of Mental Health.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs contended that a statewide court order was immediately necessary because vulnerable children were at risk of being harmed while the case was being litigated.
"Every day, a new county is saying they can't provide the services," said Laura Faer, an attorney for Public Counsel, which filed the class-action lawsuit along with Disability Rights California and the law firm Gibson Dunn & Crutcher.
David Campos, whose son is the lead plaintiff, said he felt his child was being left behind while government agencies passed the blame.
"Everybody's waiting for somebody else to take the first step," said Campos, whose son, identified as A.C. in court papers, has been receiving counseling since kindergarten. Campos and his wife, Gail, have been trying to get help for their son ever since they adopted him at age 4 knowing he suffered the effects of fetal alcohol syndrome and had been neglected and abused.
This summer, their son twice attempted suicide — swallowing half a bottle of Tylenol and trying to hang himself — and landed in juvenile hall. Through AB 3632 funding, he is receiving residential treatment for oppositional defiant disorder and attention deficit hyperactive disorder in Texas.
"When I heard the news [of the cut], I felt like I had been punched in the stomach," Gail Campos wrote in a declaration submitted with the court. "My son so desperately needs these services to get better, and I don't want him to end up in the criminal system or homeless."
Powelson said the treatment for her son, who has been diagnosed with oppositional defiant disorder and intermittent explosive disorder, had been like the "light at the end of the tunnel" for her family.
"The bad days before turned into bad weeks and bad months. My husband used to say it was like a piano falling from a tall building," she said. "Now, in treatment, he has a safe place to fall."
A week before Christmas, Judy Powelson was awaiting her son's first visit home in nine months with a mix of excitement and trepidation.
Earlier in the year, the 17-year-old's mental illness had spiraled out of control to the point that he attacked her, kicked a teacher in the groin and was hospitalized for psychiatric treatment. But since he entered residential treatment funded in part by the state, she'd seen him go through marked improvements — getting a 3.11 GPA and being voted MVP in soccer.
Now Powelson's son, identified in court papers as T.G., is one of 20,000 students across California whose mental health services may be in jeopardy in the new year because of a line-item veto by the governor. In October, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger slashed $133 million in funding for what are known as AB 3632 services, a 25-year-old program that requires state and local education and mental health agencies to jointly provide education-related mental health services.
Save Up to 90%: Sign up for our free daily e-mail to get in on exclusive deals around L.A. Powered by Groupon. Subscribe Now.
Families with children who suffer from mental illnesses ranging from depression to schizophrenia and who depend on these services have been thrown into chaos, parents and advocates say. Several counties, including Orange and Alameda, have sent out notices indicating that the services will be discontinued in January, attorneys representing the parents said.
"If my son loses this treatment, I will lose my son," Powelson said, her voice quivering. "I will lose him to mental illness, I will lose him to the criminal justice system, to drug abuse, to suicide."
She has filed a declaration about her son's situation as part of a federal class-action lawsuit seeking to block cutbacks to or discontinuation of the services. This month, a federal judge in Los Angeles heard arguments from attorneys representing the families and various state and local agencies but said he would wait until the new year before considering whether to issue an injunction.
U.S. District Judge George Wu said it wasn't immediately clear what would happen come Jan. 14, when a temporary order restoring the funding for the services is due to expire. He said he also wanted to wait for the outcome of a separate state court case in Sacramento challenging the governor's veto, which is scheduled to be heard in early January.
"I understand that the state agencies are pointing the finger and saying, 'It's your problem, it's your problem, it's your problem,' " Wu said at the hearing, adding that each agency was "waiting for somebody to blink." But he said it wasn't the right time for him to issue an order because "it's a complicated situation.... Bad things have not happened, but may happen in the future based on how these agencies act."
Attorneys representing various state and county agencies said they were trying to determine where the funds would come from, not dodging their responsibilities. They also said the four named plaintiffs in the case were currently receiving the necessary treatment and had not been notified that it would be taken away.
"They're here prematurely," said Supervising Deputy Atty. Gen. Jennifer M. Kim, representing the governor's office and the California Department of Mental Health.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs contended that a statewide court order was immediately necessary because vulnerable children were at risk of being harmed while the case was being litigated.
"Every day, a new county is saying they can't provide the services," said Laura Faer, an attorney for Public Counsel, which filed the class-action lawsuit along with Disability Rights California and the law firm Gibson Dunn & Crutcher.
David Campos, whose son is the lead plaintiff, said he felt his child was being left behind while government agencies passed the blame.
"Everybody's waiting for somebody else to take the first step," said Campos, whose son, identified as A.C. in court papers, has been receiving counseling since kindergarten. Campos and his wife, Gail, have been trying to get help for their son ever since they adopted him at age 4 knowing he suffered the effects of fetal alcohol syndrome and had been neglected and abused.
This summer, their son twice attempted suicide — swallowing half a bottle of Tylenol and trying to hang himself — and landed in juvenile hall. Through AB 3632 funding, he is receiving residential treatment for oppositional defiant disorder and attention deficit hyperactive disorder in Texas.
"When I heard the news [of the cut], I felt like I had been punched in the stomach," Gail Campos wrote in a declaration submitted with the court. "My son so desperately needs these services to get better, and I don't want him to end up in the criminal system or homeless."
Powelson said the treatment for her son, who has been diagnosed with oppositional defiant disorder and intermittent explosive disorder, had been like the "light at the end of the tunnel" for her family.
"The bad days before turned into bad weeks and bad months. My husband used to say it was like a piano falling from a tall building," she said. "Now, in treatment, he has a safe place to fall."
Friday, December 17, 2010
Troop Discharges High for 'Pre-Existing' Psychiatric Disorders
A pair of recently released government reports shows that more military trainees are being discharged for "pre-existing" psychiatric conditions than any other reason, with those cases particularly high among Marines.
The numbers suggest the military, under pressure to find recruits for two wars over the better part of the last decade, may not be catching the signs of mental illness during the enlistment process. While ailments ranging from asthma to hearing problems to orthopedic conditions accounted for a large percentage of discharges, mental health issues were the most common cause.
The military's Medical Surveillance Monthly Report and its Accession Medical Standards Analysis & Research Activity Report both confirmed this trend -- the statistics varied drastically depending on the branch.
Among Marines, 44 percent of discharges between 2004 and 2009 for pre-existing conditions were for psychiatric complications. That percentage was 24 in the Army and 18 in the Navy. It was less than 1 percent in the Air Force. The disorders ranged from depression to ADD to bipolar disorder.
The studies tracked recruits who were discharged for conditions that surfaced within six months of joining the military -- meaning many were probably discharged during training and did not see combat.
Paul Sullivan, director of veterans advocacy group Veterans for Common Sense, said the numbers reflect the "recruiting shortfall" the military has had to deal with. He said sloppier vetting opens the door for problems to surface after new member are enlisted.
In total, 3,636 Marines were discharged for psychiatric reasons between 2004 and 2009. In the Army, 4,359 were discharged. The Pentagon did not respond to a request for comment.
However, the startlingly high number of psychiatric-based discharges for recruits comes as the Pentagon faces complaints that it may be discharging combat troops on spurious mental-health grounds. Though the military has moved to recognize more cases of post-traumatic stress disorder -- as opposed to classifying them simply as "personality disorders" -- lawmakers have complained that the military is finding other psychiatric reasons to discharge troops.
The distinction is critical in determining what kind of benefits packages the discharged service member receives -- PTSD discharges get a 50 percent disability payment and health care benefits, while others do not receive that level of help after leaving the military.
Four lawmakers wrote to Defense Secretary Robert Gates in October complaining that the military was discharging members for "other physical or mental conditions not amounting to disability."
"While it is a good thing that the Pentagon has moved away from unfairly discharging combat troops by erroneously claiming a service member had a (personality disorder) rather than addressing the harmful effects of combat stress, we need to ensure a new method is not being used to deny combat veterans the care and benefits they deserve," they wrote. The letter was signed by Sens. Kit Bond, R-Mo.; Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa; Sam Brownback, R-Kansas, and Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.
They cited Pentagon data showing that while personal disorder discharges were down dramatically over the past few years, discharges for other "physical or mental" conditions rose from 1,453 to 3,844 between fiscal 2006 and 2009. Many of those conditions were labeled as "adjustment disorder," they wrote.
"We are particularly concerned that troops who display symptoms of combat stress are being expeditiously chaptered out of the military by the medical bureaucracy prior to their condition meeting formal diagnostic criteria for PTSD or other conditions that would constitute disability," the senators wrote.
Sullivan described this "patient dumping" as a serious problem in the military.
"The military finds it more expedient ... to improperly kick out tens of thousands of troops," he said.
In a response to the senators' letter, the Army assured them that it would continue to review the circumstances for such discharges.
Thomas Lamont, assistant secretary of the Army, wrote in a memo that the Army made sure soldiers discharged due to various disorders were "appropriately screened" for PTSD and traumatic brain injury.
"The Army is dedicated to ensuring that all soldiers with physical and mental conditions caused by wartime service receive the care they deserve," he wrote.
Source: Fox News
The numbers suggest the military, under pressure to find recruits for two wars over the better part of the last decade, may not be catching the signs of mental illness during the enlistment process. While ailments ranging from asthma to hearing problems to orthopedic conditions accounted for a large percentage of discharges, mental health issues were the most common cause.
The military's Medical Surveillance Monthly Report and its Accession Medical Standards Analysis & Research Activity Report both confirmed this trend -- the statistics varied drastically depending on the branch.
Among Marines, 44 percent of discharges between 2004 and 2009 for pre-existing conditions were for psychiatric complications. That percentage was 24 in the Army and 18 in the Navy. It was less than 1 percent in the Air Force. The disorders ranged from depression to ADD to bipolar disorder.
The studies tracked recruits who were discharged for conditions that surfaced within six months of joining the military -- meaning many were probably discharged during training and did not see combat.
Paul Sullivan, director of veterans advocacy group Veterans for Common Sense, said the numbers reflect the "recruiting shortfall" the military has had to deal with. He said sloppier vetting opens the door for problems to surface after new member are enlisted.
In total, 3,636 Marines were discharged for psychiatric reasons between 2004 and 2009. In the Army, 4,359 were discharged. The Pentagon did not respond to a request for comment.
However, the startlingly high number of psychiatric-based discharges for recruits comes as the Pentagon faces complaints that it may be discharging combat troops on spurious mental-health grounds. Though the military has moved to recognize more cases of post-traumatic stress disorder -- as opposed to classifying them simply as "personality disorders" -- lawmakers have complained that the military is finding other psychiatric reasons to discharge troops.
The distinction is critical in determining what kind of benefits packages the discharged service member receives -- PTSD discharges get a 50 percent disability payment and health care benefits, while others do not receive that level of help after leaving the military.
Four lawmakers wrote to Defense Secretary Robert Gates in October complaining that the military was discharging members for "other physical or mental conditions not amounting to disability."
"While it is a good thing that the Pentagon has moved away from unfairly discharging combat troops by erroneously claiming a service member had a (personality disorder) rather than addressing the harmful effects of combat stress, we need to ensure a new method is not being used to deny combat veterans the care and benefits they deserve," they wrote. The letter was signed by Sens. Kit Bond, R-Mo.; Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa; Sam Brownback, R-Kansas, and Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.
They cited Pentagon data showing that while personal disorder discharges were down dramatically over the past few years, discharges for other "physical or mental" conditions rose from 1,453 to 3,844 between fiscal 2006 and 2009. Many of those conditions were labeled as "adjustment disorder," they wrote.
"We are particularly concerned that troops who display symptoms of combat stress are being expeditiously chaptered out of the military by the medical bureaucracy prior to their condition meeting formal diagnostic criteria for PTSD or other conditions that would constitute disability," the senators wrote.
Sullivan described this "patient dumping" as a serious problem in the military.
"The military finds it more expedient ... to improperly kick out tens of thousands of troops," he said.
In a response to the senators' letter, the Army assured them that it would continue to review the circumstances for such discharges.
Thomas Lamont, assistant secretary of the Army, wrote in a memo that the Army made sure soldiers discharged due to various disorders were "appropriately screened" for PTSD and traumatic brain injury.
"The Army is dedicated to ensuring that all soldiers with physical and mental conditions caused by wartime service receive the care they deserve," he wrote.
Source: Fox News
Thursday, December 2, 2010
Support a MHA of MT grant to prevent suicide
Please support our grant to promote the Montana Suicide Prevention Lifeline 800-273-TALK (8255) on movie theater screens, and highway billboards.
Vote by sms texting 104356 to 73774 (PepsiFreshText), or on the web at http://www.refresheverything.com/stopsuicide
Note that you should not receive spam by texting or voting on the web
Thank You -
Julio Brionez
Prevention Coordinator
Mental Health America of MT
Vote by sms texting 104356 to 73774 (PepsiFreshText), or on the web at http://www.refresheverything.com/stopsuicide
Note that you should not receive spam by texting or voting on the web
Thank You -
Julio Brionez
Prevention Coordinator
Mental Health America of MT
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Mental Illness Hit 1 in 5 U.S. Adults in Past Yea
A new survey finds that 20 percent of U.S. adults -- over 45 million people -- experienced mental illness in the past year.
Overall, 4.8 percent (11 million people) suffered serious mental illness, 8.4 million people had serious thoughts of suicide, 2.2 million made suicide plans, and one million attempted suicide, according to the 2009 National Survey on Drug Use and Health. Nearly 20 percent (8.9 million) of adults with mental illness in the past year also had a substance abuse disorder, the report found. The rate was 25.7 percent for those with a serious mental illness -- about four times higher than the rate of 6.5 percent among people without a serious mental illness,
The survey was released by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.
Among its other findings:
* Women are more likely than men to experience mental illness -- 23.8 percent vs. 15.6 percent.
* Young adults had the highest rate of mental woes (30 percent) while those aged 50 and older had the lowest rate (13.7 percent).
"Too many Americans are not getting the help they need and opportunities to prevent and intervene early are being missed," SAMHSA Administrator Pamela S. Hyde said in an agency news release.
Read more here.
Overall, 4.8 percent (11 million people) suffered serious mental illness, 8.4 million people had serious thoughts of suicide, 2.2 million made suicide plans, and one million attempted suicide, according to the 2009 National Survey on Drug Use and Health. Nearly 20 percent (8.9 million) of adults with mental illness in the past year also had a substance abuse disorder, the report found. The rate was 25.7 percent for those with a serious mental illness -- about four times higher than the rate of 6.5 percent among people without a serious mental illness,
The survey was released by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.
Among its other findings:
* Women are more likely than men to experience mental illness -- 23.8 percent vs. 15.6 percent.
* Young adults had the highest rate of mental woes (30 percent) while those aged 50 and older had the lowest rate (13.7 percent).
"Too many Americans are not getting the help they need and opportunities to prevent and intervene early are being missed," SAMHSA Administrator Pamela S. Hyde said in an agency news release.
Read more here.
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
The Connection Between Substance Abuse and Mental Health
Our mental health affects the way that we feel and respond to life on a daily basis. When there is something wrong or out of balance in our mental state, it is going to throw off everything until it is properly
addressed, diagnosed, and treated. There is a very definite connection that has been discovered between substance abuse and mental health, or better said, a lack of true mental health. This is not to say that every person who abuses drugs or alcohol have a mental illness, but that there is a higher rate of mentally ill addicts than those who are not.
Of course, there is also the fact that many people believe that substance abuse and addiction are mental illnesses in and of themselves. This may very well be the case, but even if it's not, substance abuse is certainly an ailment of sorts and it needs to be treated alongside the mental illness that may have brought it on to begin with.
Many times, people with a mental illness, especially one that has not been diagnosed and is not being treated by a professional, will begin to "self-medicate". This essentially means that they will seek out substances that relieve the inner pain, stress, confusion, or other negative feelings that they are experiencing. For instance, a person with severe depression may begin to take "uppers" to allow them to feel happiness, even if it's only temporary. Often, the person with the mental health problem doesn't understand why they feel the way that they do, but once they find a substance that relieves the bad feelings, they are likely to become addicted quite quickly.
When that occurs, the person is now dealing with a dual diagnosis, meaning that there is a substance abuse problem as well as an additional mental health problem and both will need to be addressed and treated. An inpatient facility is likely the place to start, where the person is going to have intensive treatment, followed by aftercare day treatment programs for the substance abuse and psychiatric treatment and monitoring for the mental illness.
It is so easy to judge people that we see who are obviously dealing with substance abuse, but there is always an underlying problem that has led to the point we are seeing today. Often, that problem has to do with a mental illness that needs to be properly diagnosed and treated by a professional.
Published by Victoria Tiegert
addressed, diagnosed, and treated. There is a very definite connection that has been discovered between substance abuse and mental health, or better said, a lack of true mental health. This is not to say that every person who abuses drugs or alcohol have a mental illness, but that there is a higher rate of mentally ill addicts than those who are not.
Of course, there is also the fact that many people believe that substance abuse and addiction are mental illnesses in and of themselves. This may very well be the case, but even if it's not, substance abuse is certainly an ailment of sorts and it needs to be treated alongside the mental illness that may have brought it on to begin with.
Many times, people with a mental illness, especially one that has not been diagnosed and is not being treated by a professional, will begin to "self-medicate". This essentially means that they will seek out substances that relieve the inner pain, stress, confusion, or other negative feelings that they are experiencing. For instance, a person with severe depression may begin to take "uppers" to allow them to feel happiness, even if it's only temporary. Often, the person with the mental health problem doesn't understand why they feel the way that they do, but once they find a substance that relieves the bad feelings, they are likely to become addicted quite quickly.
When that occurs, the person is now dealing with a dual diagnosis, meaning that there is a substance abuse problem as well as an additional mental health problem and both will need to be addressed and treated. An inpatient facility is likely the place to start, where the person is going to have intensive treatment, followed by aftercare day treatment programs for the substance abuse and psychiatric treatment and monitoring for the mental illness.
It is so easy to judge people that we see who are obviously dealing with substance abuse, but there is always an underlying problem that has led to the point we are seeing today. Often, that problem has to do with a mental illness that needs to be properly diagnosed and treated by a professional.
Published by Victoria Tiegert
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Mental illness stigma lingers even though people understand it's a brain disease
By Shari Roan, Los Angeles Times
Public perception of mental illness and addiction has changed significantly -- and for the good -- in the last 15 years. That doesn't mean, however, that people feel comfortable working or living near or being friends with someone with mental illness, according to a major new survey.
The study compared people's responses to vignettes involving mental illness and addiction to gauge public understanding of the illness and feelings toward those who are ill or addicted. The surveys took place in 1996 and 2006. The idea, the researchers said, was to assess whether major efforts to improve the treatment of mental conditions and eliminate stigma in the United States is working. Several sweeping efforts have been made in the past two decades to educate Americans on mental illness. A major theme of these campaigns is that mental illnesses and addiction are biological, brain-based, sometimes-genetic illnesses that are each "a disease like any other."
The survey finds the public has embraced that concept, but only to a point. The percentage of people who attributed depression to neurobiological causes increased from 54% of those surveyed in 1996 to 67% in 2006. Those who endorsed psychiatrists to help treat alcoholism increased from 61% to 79% in the 10-year period.
However, the willingness to associate with people with these disorders did not change much. For example, the percentage of people who said they are unwilling to work closely with someone with major depression was 46% in 1996 and 47% in 2006. The percentage of people who considered people with schizophrenia to be a danger to others was 54% in 1996 and 60% in 2006.
Though research and treatment options for people with mental illness or addiction have clearly improved, many could be held back by social stigma, said the authors of the study, led by Indiana University researchers. "Public attitudes matter," they wrote. "Attitudes can translate directly into fear or understanding, rejection or acceptance, delayed service use or early medical attention."
It may take a new approach -- something other than science-based anti-stigma campaigns -- to change public attitudes, the authors said. One such approach is to focus on the "abilities, competencies, and community integration of persons with mental illness and substance use disorders."
(Which brings to mind Los Angeles Laker's star Ron Artest and his efforts to raise money for mental health services by raffling his NBA Championship ring. Artest, who has been treated for depression, has been outspoken about the importance and value of seeking treatment. His "Win My Bling" raffle raised $120,000 in just one day last week.)
In a commentary accompanying the study, Dr. Howard H. Goldman of the University of Maryland points to encouraging signs that people with these diseases can live on equitable terms with those who have not suffered addiction or mental illness.
"We may not have eliminated social stigmatization of symptomatic individuals with mental illness," he wrote. "But improved treatment has helped many of them to make their symptoms and dysfunction less visible and less problematic."
The papers appear in the current issue of the American Journal of Psychiatry.
Public perception of mental illness and addiction has changed significantly -- and for the good -- in the last 15 years. That doesn't mean, however, that people feel comfortable working or living near or being friends with someone with mental illness, according to a major new survey.
The study compared people's responses to vignettes involving mental illness and addiction to gauge public understanding of the illness and feelings toward those who are ill or addicted. The surveys took place in 1996 and 2006. The idea, the researchers said, was to assess whether major efforts to improve the treatment of mental conditions and eliminate stigma in the United States is working. Several sweeping efforts have been made in the past two decades to educate Americans on mental illness. A major theme of these campaigns is that mental illnesses and addiction are biological, brain-based, sometimes-genetic illnesses that are each "a disease like any other."
The survey finds the public has embraced that concept, but only to a point. The percentage of people who attributed depression to neurobiological causes increased from 54% of those surveyed in 1996 to 67% in 2006. Those who endorsed psychiatrists to help treat alcoholism increased from 61% to 79% in the 10-year period.
However, the willingness to associate with people with these disorders did not change much. For example, the percentage of people who said they are unwilling to work closely with someone with major depression was 46% in 1996 and 47% in 2006. The percentage of people who considered people with schizophrenia to be a danger to others was 54% in 1996 and 60% in 2006.
Though research and treatment options for people with mental illness or addiction have clearly improved, many could be held back by social stigma, said the authors of the study, led by Indiana University researchers. "Public attitudes matter," they wrote. "Attitudes can translate directly into fear or understanding, rejection or acceptance, delayed service use or early medical attention."
It may take a new approach -- something other than science-based anti-stigma campaigns -- to change public attitudes, the authors said. One such approach is to focus on the "abilities, competencies, and community integration of persons with mental illness and substance use disorders."
(Which brings to mind Los Angeles Laker's star Ron Artest and his efforts to raise money for mental health services by raffling his NBA Championship ring. Artest, who has been treated for depression, has been outspoken about the importance and value of seeking treatment. His "Win My Bling" raffle raised $120,000 in just one day last week.)
In a commentary accompanying the study, Dr. Howard H. Goldman of the University of Maryland points to encouraging signs that people with these diseases can live on equitable terms with those who have not suffered addiction or mental illness.
"We may not have eliminated social stigmatization of symptomatic individuals with mental illness," he wrote. "But improved treatment has helped many of them to make their symptoms and dysfunction less visible and less problematic."
The papers appear in the current issue of the American Journal of Psychiatry.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)