The Euphemania Treadmill

Have you often wondered why the vocabulary in our field changes so frequently? Today the accepted terms for describing the difficulties we address and the people who experience those difficulties are "behavioral health" and "person served."  But not so very long ago the accepted terms were "mental illness” and "client". And if you look even farther back the terms “madness” and “patient” were used.  This change in language is interesting because if you are forgetful or foolish enough to use the old terms you would likely be considered insensitive or disrespectful to the individuals involved. Let me give you a more graphic example of this- as a young student of developmental psychology, the textbook that was chosen by the course professor was a relatively old one and the terms used to describe individuals with significant cognitive impairments -what we call developmental disabilities today- most of us would find disrespectful and repugnant.  The terms that were used in that textbook were “idiot, imbecile and moron.”   Not long after I completed that course, the terms used to describe individuals with cognitive impairments changed.  The terms “idiot, imbecile, moron” were viewed as pejorative and disrespectful and were replaced by the terms “mild”, “moderate” and “severely mentally retarded."  The term mentally retarded was in fashion for several years but eventually this term too was viewed as disrespectful and was replaced by "developmentally delayed."  And if history repeats itself, eventually the terms we now use will be replaced by some other terms which popular opinion and perhaps even scientific opnion will consider to be more appropriate, descriptive or respectful to the individuals involved.   

Are these changes in language merely an exercise in political correctness or are these changes in language indicative of some other issue?  A recent book by Ralph Keyes  (http://www.ralphkeyes.com/ ) examines this very interesting phenomenon and suggests some answers they may be helpful to us as we strive to foster recovery for those we serve. 

In his 2010 book Euphemania, Keyes postulates that we use euphemisms to discuss any topic we feel uncomfortable with.    In other words, euphemisms are a way for us to confront and deal with what we find distasteful or frightening or wish to avoid.  Keyes provides as evidence for his argument the euphemisms our society uses to describe death. For example when someone has died we say they have "passed." In a more humorous vein we may say the dead are "pushing up the daisies.”  In France, the French use  "eating the roots of dandelions" to describe someone who has died.  The use of these terms allow us to confront what we find ultimately and innately unpleasant and distasteful.

We have seen the same type of “euphemism treadmill” that Keyes describes in his book in the language of our field. The terms that have been used to discuss or describe behavioral health needs including “madness”, "mental illness" etc. eventually were replaced by a terms that are viewed as more descriptive or respectful.   The term mental illness have been  replaced  with  "behaviorally disordered" and people who receive treatment for their difficulties are no longer called patients or clients but consumers.  And in the last few years the term “consumer” has begun to lose favor and is slowly being replaced by the term "person served."  In fact, our agency began using the term person served about  three years ago.  We did so in part because the term “consumer” implied someone who used  up the community’s resources without making a contribution back to the community.

Is it possible that the euphemism phenomenon that we observe in the language we use to discuss mental illness  underscores the fact that our society continues to find  mental illness frightening and something to avoid.   Is the answer to the fear that drives the euphemism treadmill more education to reduce the stigma associated with mental illness?   See next week’s blog for the surprising answer to this question! 


This is the first of three essays addressing recovery and how we as an agency can foster recovery and greater acceptance by the community of those with mental health needs.




Be well!!


Gail

This is the first of three essays that addresses recovery and how as an agency we can better understand recovery and assist those we serve in integrating into the community.