The language that we use: comments on “Pathogenic language in psychiatric practice and how to combat it”

Abstract

Psychiatrists have a professional duty to contribute to efforts to limit the stigma associated with mental illness and its treatment.1 In their recent article, Bloch and Haslam2 elegantly emphasise the importance of language in psychiatry to the experiences of people affected by mental illness. They argue that certain terminology can or may cause harm. Such language has the following characteristics: (i) dehumanisation by representing people as objects, (ii) denigration by construing people as blameworthy, (iii) intimation by provoking unnecessary anxiety and (iv) demoralisation by undermining sense of hope. In considering their criteria, we wonder whether terminology associated with involuntary mental health treatment of people involved in the criminal justice system may have such pathogenic effects.