Posts

Out Now: New Edition of Bestselling Book – Models of Madness

/3 Comments/in , , /by

Models of Madness

Psychological, Social and Biological Approaches to Psychosis

Second Edition

Edited by John Read, University of Liverpool, UK

and Jacqui Dillon, National Chair, Hearing Voices Network, UK

 “Truly, a revolution is occuring in our understanding of severe mental illness…This volume will serve as an inspiration, not only to established clinicians and researchers, but to the young people who will develop better services for people with psychosis in the future.” 

– Prof Richard Bentall, From the Foreword.

 

“The publication is very timely given the international debate about this month’s publication of DSM-5, the latest and most controversial version of psychiatry’s diagnostic ‘bible’. Our book documents all the evidence showing that these diagnoses are unscientific and a major cause of the stigma faced by people who receive these labels. It also presents the research demonstrating the urgent need for a fundamental paradigm shift towards evidence-based, effective and humane mental health services.”

– Prof John Read, Lead Editor

Are hallucinations and delusions really symptoms of an illness called ‘schizophrenia’? Are mental health problems really caused by chemical imbalances and genetic predispositions? Are psychiatric drugs as effective and safe as the drug companies claim? Is madness preventable?

This second edition of Models of Madness challenges the simplistic, pessimistic and often damaging theories and treatments of the ‘medical model’ of madness. Psychiatric diagnoses and medications are based on the false premise that human misery and distress are casued by chemical imbalances and genetic predispositions, and ignore the social causes of psychosis and what psychiatrists call ‘schizophrenia’. This edition updates the now extensive body of research showing that hallucinations and delusions etc. are best understood as reactions to adverse life events and that psychological and social approaches to helping are more effective and far safer than psychiatric drugs and electroshock treatment. A new final chapter discusses why such a damaging ideology has come to dominate mental health and, most importantly, how to change that.  

 Models of Madness is divided into three sections:

  1. Section One provides a history of madness, including examples of violence against the ‘mentally ill’, before critiquing the theories and treatments of contemporary biological psychiatry and documenting the corrupting influence of drug companies
  2. Section Two summarises the research showing that hallucinations, delusions etc. are primarily caused by adverse life events (eg. parental loss, bullying, abuse and neglect in childhood, poverty, etc.) and can be understood using psychological models ranging from cognitive to psychodynamic
  3. Section Three presents the evidence for a range of effective psychological and social approaches to treatment, from cognitive and family therapy to primary prevention.

This book brings together thirty-seven contributors from ten countries and a wide range of scientific disciplines. It provides an evidence-based, optimistic antidote to the pessimism of biological psychiatry.

Models of Madness will be essential reading for all involved in mental health, including service users, family members, service managers, policy makers, nurses, clinical psychologists, psychiatrists, psychotherapists, counsellors, psychoanalysts, social workers, occupational therapists, and art therapists.

Download flyer to receive 20% discount from Routledge!

Models of Madness Flyer

http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415579537/

 

 

What is your Opinion of Psychiatric Diagnosis?

/13 Comments/in , /by

This is an important paper written by Steven Coles and colleagues about psychiatric diagnosis. What do you think? Have your say!

What is your Opinion of Psychiatric Diagnosis?

What is your view on psychiatric diagnosis? Should the diagnosis of schizophrenia be abolished as the Campaign for the Abolition of the Schizophrenia Label wish? For both those working in mental health services and those on the receiving end, how important is diagnosis to your life? There are many different views on psychiatric diagnosis from fierce advocates to those who decry the practice. A number of survivors, academics, professionals, and service users have criticised diagnosis. However, within mental health services psychiatric diagnosis remains dominant. Psychiatrists (and other professionals) claim they use diagnosis to understand people’s experiences, behaviour and distress.  Diagnosis shapes how services are organised, who will be helped and how services will support or “treat” people. Psychiatric diagnosis also has a major impact on whether people are detained against there will in hospital – the civil liberties of people with a psychiatric diagnosis are at a greater risk than anyone else in society (other than suspected terrorists). Diagnosis influences whether people are forced to take major tranquilizers (“antipsychotics”), and whether they receive financial benefits.

Despite the immense controversy surrounding diagnosis, my experience is that the debates around diagnosis are not openly discussed between staff or with people using (or forcibly brought into) mental health services. Psychiatric diagnosis has become an everyday and often unquestioned part of mental health practice. Is this simply because critics of diagnosis have weak arguments? Is it because the scientific basis of psychiatric diagnosis is so strong? Is there no alternative? A group of Clinical Psychologists working in East Midlands Adult Mental Health Services have looked at the issue of psychiatric diagnosis and written a position paper (Coles & SPIG, 2010). They conclude that “psychiatric diagnosis does not meet its scientific and expert claims” and does not deserve to be so dominant in mental health services.

The East Midlands group highlighted a number of negative effects of psychiatric diagnosis. They note that diagnosis places the cause of difficulties on the individual; the group feel more attention should be paid to people’s life experiences, such as abuse, poverty, discrimination and disempowerment. The position paper also observes that the language of diagnosis is barrier to communication between staff and people using services. Furthermore, diagnosis is not aware that it is based upon dominant western (often male) ideas of what is normal, and ignores that other cultures and subcultures might have different or a broader idea of what is normal. The paper also notes some modest alternatives to moving beyond diagnosis (for access to the document see www.bps.org.uk/dcp-sigpr/publications-%26-documents/publications_home.cfm).

The East Midlands Paper is accessible at the above link, as well as on the Hearing Voices Network website. The group is hoping to open up a debate around diagnosis and would welcome people’s thoughts on the paper and on diagnosis. The East Midlands paper suggests that the current dominance and use of diagnosis is part of the problem and not part of the solution as psychiatry claims. What do you think? What is your experience of diagnosis?

References

Coles, S. & SPIG (2010).  Position on Psychiatric Diagnosis. East Midlands: Psychosis and Complex Mental Health Special Interest Group

Steven Coles

Clinical Psychologist

steven.coles@nottshc.nhs.uk