{"id":118,"date":"2022-04-28T23:03:28","date_gmt":"2022-04-29T03:03:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.ryerson.ca\/accessibilitymentalhealthandcreativity\/?post_type=chapter&p=118"},"modified":"2023-04-16T09:50:25","modified_gmt":"2023-04-16T13:50:25","slug":"medical-and-social-models-of-mental-health-disability","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/accessibilitymentalhealthandcreativity\/chapter\/medical-and-social-models-of-mental-health-disability\/","title":{"raw":"Medical and Social Models of Mental Health Disability","rendered":"Medical and Social Models of Mental Health Disability"},"content":{"raw":"

Defining Medical and Social Models of Mental Health Disability<\/h1>\r\nby Catherine Jenkins\r\n\r\nThe medical model of disease or disability tends to reduce \u201cabnormal\u201d states to their physio-chemical or genetic components\u2013something to be remedied. It is often criticized as reductionist for excluding the patient\u2019s lived experience. As clinical psychologist George Albee (1975) charged, the medical model can pathologize people\u2019s \u201cproblems of living\u201d (as cited in Hogan, 2019<\/a>). Labeling someone with a mental health disability (for instance bipolar) can be perceived as oppressive and stigmatizing; these kinds of labels are difficult to shake once applied, and can lead to reduced opportunities when people feel doors closing. The medical model relies heavily on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) (2013). This manual has been criticized as overdiagnosing and medicalizing elements of human diversity (e.g, autism; earlier editions of the DSM considered homosexuality a mental disorder).\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nSocial models of medicine and mental health tend to focus on psychosocial aspects impacting health and illness, creating an anti-reductionist view. \u201cCures\u201d are seen to lie in social reform, rather than individual treatment. Medical declarations of illness are viewed as a damaging status imposed on people by medical practitioners; the path to resolution is through social and political reform, rather than individual treatment. Here, disability is perceived \u201cas the product of an unaccommodating and oppressive society, rather than an individual and medical problem\u201d Hogan, 2019<\/a> para. 1). While this is an interesting point of theoretical debate, it may have limited impact for individuals and their mental health concerns.\r\n\r\n \r\n
\r\n\r\n\u201cThere are always hidden challenges. Everybody has something\u2026 We all have to find ways to get around our limits and our challenges and we have to find ways to use what we do have.\u201d\r\n\r\nDianne Acey, Psychologist and retired College Instructor<\/strong>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n \r\n\r\nSince the 1970s, various medical theorists have tried to merge these opposing views into a biopsychosocial model that acknowledges both biological and psychosocial factors. Although still rooted in the medical model, the acknowledgement of social and environmental factors encourages practitioners to listen to patients\u2019 experiences, rather than prioritizing lab results. This hybrid model works to combine what might be negatively perceived as disability, to become positively perceived and valued as human diversity. People with disabilities are invited into the conversation to express their views, rather than feeling further stigmatized and disabled by the medical system\u2019s attitudes. One way to invite students with diagnosed mental health disabilities into the conversation is to normalize accommodations for all students through alternative creative assignments.\r\n\r\nMary Krohnert, Art Therapist, Founder of The Living Room Community Arts Studio<\/strong>\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n[embed]https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=604ZAoD02lw[\/embed]\r\n\r\nSociety\u2019s assumptions about madness, reinforced by dominant medical conventions to pathologize, have been challenged in recent years by alternative theories of madness. Medicalization, or psychiatrization, can lead to a sense of just being assigned a label, becoming an objectified case. This is an alienating experience in which one can feel erased from one\u2019s experiential self (Russo, 2014<\/a>).\r\n\r\nSeeking emancipation from this kind of reductionism, people who\u2019ve experienced the mental health system have been publishing survivor narratives for over twenty-five years. Danielle Landry<\/a>\u2019s (2016) survey article examines twenty such mental health survivor narratives. As Landry (2016) suggests, \u201cthese texts represent a collective effort to develop survivor knowledge and reclaim the meaning of madness and distress\u201d (p. 1448) in a way that challenges the dominant colonialist and patriarchal medical discourse. Here, the focus is on well-being, recovery, and respect for people\u2019s experiences and self-identity.\r\n\r\nAlternative theories of madness have also become part of arts and academic discourses. For instance, Ekaterina Netchitailova<\/a> (2019) argues that the reductionist biomedical view of madness ignores both the perennial mystery of madness, as well as the lived experiences of artists. McWade, Milton, and Beresford<\/a> (2015) place mad studies in dialogue with neurodiversity to find mutual support within academe, recognizing the value of the experiences of both groups, as well as recognizing that they are often dismissed.\r\n\r\nNeurodiversity (ND), a term coined by Judy Singer in 1998 (Armstrong, 2011), recognizes the wide genetic variation in mental processing. ND includes the autism spectrum, ADHD, dyslexia, Tourette syndrome, and other variations in socializing, learning, thinking, and attention (Raj, 2021<\/a>). Some people are just wired differently from the majority; this doesn\u2019t mean they should be pathologized. It also doesn\u2019t mean that they aren\u2019t smart or that they\u2019re lazy. It may, however, mean that in an academic context some people require additional time, support, and understanding to achieve success.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nMary Krohnert, Art Therapist, Founder of The Living Room Community Arts Studio<\/strong>\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n[embed]https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=6XK8iYTwndU[\/embed]\r\n\r\n \r\n
\r\n

Quiz<\/h1>\r\n<\/header>\r\n
[h5p id=\"5\"]<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n ","rendered":"

Defining Medical and Social Models of Mental Health Disability<\/h1>\n

by Catherine Jenkins<\/p>\n

The medical model of disease or disability tends to reduce \u201cabnormal\u201d states to their physio-chemical or genetic components\u2013something to be remedied. It is often criticized as reductionist for excluding the patient\u2019s lived experience. As clinical psychologist George Albee (1975) charged, the medical model can pathologize people\u2019s \u201cproblems of living\u201d (as cited in Hogan, 2019<\/a>). Labeling someone with a mental health disability (for instance bipolar) can be perceived as oppressive and stigmatizing; these kinds of labels are difficult to shake once applied, and can lead to reduced opportunities when people feel doors closing. The medical model relies heavily on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) (2013). This manual has been criticized as overdiagnosing and medicalizing elements of human diversity (e.g, autism; earlier editions of the DSM considered homosexuality a mental disorder).<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Social models of medicine and mental health tend to focus on psychosocial aspects impacting health and illness, creating an anti-reductionist view. \u201cCures\u201d are seen to lie in social reform, rather than individual treatment. Medical declarations of illness are viewed as a damaging status imposed on people by medical practitioners; the path to resolution is through social and political reform, rather than individual treatment. Here, disability is perceived \u201cas the product of an unaccommodating and oppressive society, rather than an individual and medical problem\u201d Hogan, 2019<\/a> para. 1). While this is an interesting point of theoretical debate, it may have limited impact for individuals and their mental health concerns.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n

\u201cThere are always hidden challenges. Everybody has something\u2026 We all have to find ways to get around our limits and our challenges and we have to find ways to use what we do have.\u201d<\/p>\n

Dianne Acey, Psychologist and retired College Instructor<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

Since the 1970s, various medical theorists have tried to merge these opposing views into a biopsychosocial model that acknowledges both biological and psychosocial factors. Although still rooted in the medical model, the acknowledgement of social and environmental factors encourages practitioners to listen to patients\u2019 experiences, rather than prioritizing lab results. This hybrid model works to combine what might be negatively perceived as disability, to become positively perceived and valued as human diversity. People with disabilities are invited into the conversation to express their views, rather than feeling further stigmatized and disabled by the medical system\u2019s attitudes. One way to invite students with diagnosed mental health disabilities into the conversation is to normalize accommodations for all students through alternative creative assignments.<\/p>\n

Mary Krohnert, Art Therapist, Founder of The Living Room Community Arts Studio<\/strong><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n