Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page
The casual use of stigmatising language relating to mental
health is everywhere. From throw-away descriptions of best friends as being
totally mad, to a busy weekend as being mental. Much of the
language that is commonly used to describe mental health conflicts with a focus
on a strength-based and recovery-orientated outlook.[1] A focus on
language that is respectful of people who have experienced reduced mental
fitness and the promotion of communication that focuses on recovery and
personal empowerment has all kinds of benefits. Correcting the terminology used
is not about political correctness, but recognises that language has an impact
on shaping and reflecting currents of thought and feelings towards this issue.
It also sends an important message about considering those whose lives have
been affected.
The terms ‘mental illness’ and ‘post-traumatic stress
disorder’ (PTSD) are highly-stigmatising as they reinforce the ‘illness state’
and inadequately recognise the life of the person being described. They also
operate to the exclusion of a focus on recovery and the potential benefits of
an experience with reduced mental fitness. Preferred terms that were suggested
during the course of this research include ‘mental fitness’ (Major General
Jeffrey Sengelman), a term used in this report where practicable, and
Operational Stress Injury (Peter Leahy—Chairman, Soldier On), both of which are
intended to ground the language in a biological foundation. Lieutenant Colonel
James Kidd stated, ‘I believe “mental resilience” is a term that suggests a
proactive disposition and is therefore more useful’. Others suggested a need to
avoid stigmatising medicalised language altogether and talk about ‘blokes
feeling angry and thinking about stuff more than they used to’ (Troy
Simmonds—veteran). Another current serving military officer, Lieutenant Colonel
Ian Langford, commented that the effects of war on the human mind are entirely
normal and to be expected. As part of evidence to an inquiry in the 43rd
parliament, the following was reported:
Legacy noted that there have been attempts overseas to
characterise mental health issues not as a disorder (for example, PTSD), but as
a battlefield wound or operational injury.
Legacy submitted that such an approach to terminology would
help to normalise mental health wounds and injuries as part of battle, and be
perceived as more honourable and easier to accept than something termed as a
‘disorder’. They submitted that this could also assist families to convince
their veteran partner to seek treatment and support as required. Legacy
suggested terminology such as ‘Battlefield Stress Wound’, or ‘Operational
Stress Injury’.[2]
While care needs to be taken to ensure that people affected
are not discouraged from seeking professional advice and support, believing
that severe symptoms are normal, consistent terminology needs to be adopted
that avoids language which fuels stigmatisation. It is also beneficial to avoid
the word ‘suffer’ and the language of ‘harm’, and instead focus on the ways in
which these experiences can potentially lead to growth in other ways and an
ability to adapt to change. Suffering is a subjective experience; through
discourse we impose suffering on people with PTSD, thus limiting the individual
and society from a fuller understanding of this condition. The removal of
judgemental labels might allow people to attach their own feelings to the
condition, thus empowering them and allowing for hope and new meaning. PTSD may
not be all about suffering; the pain may also result in personal and societal
growth (Paula Dabovich—researcher, University of Adelaide).
[1]. See, for example: Mental Health, Drugs and
Regions Division, 2011. Recovery-oriented practice literature review,
Victorian Government Department of Health, Melbourne.
[2]. APH Joint Standing Committee on Foreign
Affairs, Defence and Trade—Inquiry of the Defence Sub-Committee, 2013. Care of
ADF personnel wounded and injured on operations—report released June 2013 (p.
53—point 5.21-2) Canberra.