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

No Thumbnail Available
File version
Author(s)
Suetani, S
Kisely, S
Parker, S
Primary Supervisor
Other Supervisors
Editor(s)
Date
2020
Size
File type(s)
Location
License
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.

Journal Title

Australasian Psychiatry

Conference Title
Book Title
Edition
Volume
Issue
Thesis Type
Degree Program
School
Publisher link
Patent number
Funder(s)
Grant identifier(s)
Rights Statement
Rights Statement
Item Access Status
Note

This publication has been entered as an advanced online version in Griffith Research Online.

Access the data
Related item(s)
Subject

Biomedical and clinical sciences

Psychology

Persistent link to this record
Citation

Suetani, S; Kisely, S; Parker, S, The language that we use: comments on “Pathogenic language in psychiatric practice and how to combat it”, Australasian Psychiatry, 2020

Collections