FYM will be away for a short while...

Hi guys,

This is a short blog post to let you know that I will not be posting as Free Your Mind for a short while due to being sectioned.

As soon as I'm discharged, I promise that posting will continue as usual.

Thank you for continuing to support Free Your Mind and thank you for continuing to read this blog.

Take care.

Peace & Love.
Nicola Edwards of FYM. x

Using the term 'Service User'

"Service User" is a generic term used by many mental health service providers, particularly within the public sector, as a description of the people who use mental health services. But, amongst both the people using the services and mental health professionals alike, there are many who find this term too ambiguous and feel it carries its own negative implications or connotations.

Personally, I am indifferent to the term "Service User", but I was interested to know where issues with this terminology come from; what the alternative terms are; and what stigma, if any, is attached to this term.

Some of the issues I've heard stated with the term "Service User" include its ambiguity - some people feel it says nothing of the problems and issues faced by those with mental illnesses, and many whom are classed as "Service Users" feel this is inaccurate if they do not in fact use any mental health services. Other issues with the term include its implications that a person has a dependency on a service, as well as negative connotations of the word "user" - for example, this term could describe someone manipulating others, or a person who uses illicit substances.

However, at the same time; "Service User" is a generic term of a business-like nature, it may not be an entirely pleasant phrase, but, when used in the correct context, it is accurate terminology for describing a person who receives support from services.

There is alternative terminology to the term "Service User", which includes: "Client", "Patient" and "Survivors". But there is disagreement on which terms are appropriate.

The Mental Health Foundation defined the terms used to refer to those with a mental illness, such as "Service User", "Patient", "Client", etc., in regards to their literal meanings and why they are used by mental health services and professionals.

"Service Users" -- This is a 'popular term with service providers... used as a generic description of the people who use mental health services.'

"Clients" -- 'Emphasises the professional nature of the relationship with the mental health professional.'

"Patients" -- This is a widely used term which, according to the Mental Health Foundation, 'stresses the medical focus of the relationship between the person and the service.'

"Survivors" -- 'A term used to describe people experiencing/living through mental health problems and/or the consequences of a life event - such as sexual abuse... It is regarded as more empowering than the more passive "sufferer" with its connotations of "victim".'

The terminology "Survivor" is not to be confused with "Psychiatric Survivor"

"Psychiatric Survivors" -- According to the Mental Health Foundation, "Psychiatric Survivor" is 'A 'rights' based term used by mental health/survivor activists who assert that some forms of psychiatric treatment can e considered abusive. They campaign for reforms to end the powers of psychiatry to compulsorily detain people and enforce treatment against their will.'

The Psychiatrist (Formerly The Psychiatrist Bulletin) carried out a survey amongst mental health professionals to determine which terms they felt receivers of mental health services should be known as (from their professional viewpoint as someone working for these services). "Patient" was found to be the preferred term by psychiatrists and nurses. The term "Client" was found to be an equally preferable term as "Patient", in alternative to "Service User", by social workers and occupational therapists. "Service User" was found by the survey to be the most disliked terminology overall.

It appears to me that issue with the term "Service User" is down to its connotations and implications, rather than it actually being a derogatory term. Most of the terminology used to describe a person receiving support from a mental health service seem to be evidence-based - which, in my opinion, is how they should be.

"Service User" is a generic term widely used to describe people who receive support from mental health services, but, it can still carry negative implications and connotations; even though the terminology itself is not derogatory.

There are many terms and it is impossible to please everyone, but I think the important thing to remember is the term "Service User" does not describe an individual - in regards to their personality and personal characteristics - but refers to an "activity" in which they partake as part of their everyday lives.

All Walks Book Club

Free Your Mind is proud to be taking part in the All Walks book club.

All Walks is a project co-founded by Debra Bourne, Caryn Franklin and Erin O'Connor which aims to challenge both the fashion industry's, and society's, view of body image and beauty.

Anyone can take part in the All Walks book club; all you need is Bodies by Susie Orbach, which is the first book we will be reading. We will be reading one chapter a week starting with the introduction and chapter one. Discussion will take place on Twitter with the hash(#) tag #AWbookclub and on the following Facebook discussion forum: http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?topic=17591&uid=275187151550. Make sure you are a part of it!


Find out more about the All Walks book club on the All Walks blog here: http://allwalks.org/?p=2214

FYM on Twitter: @FYMcampaign - http://twitter.com/#!/FYMcampaign

All Walks on Twitter: @allwalkscatwalk - http://twitter.com/#!/allwalkscatwalk

Also involved in the discussion:

Michael 'Frost' Williamson: @mwfrost - http://twitter.com/#!/mwfrost - fashion designer and stylist, and blogger of Safety Pin Charm fashion blog, whom is also involved in All Walks.

Upcoming 'Broken Paths' Art Exhibition at Croydon's Fairfield Halls

Click above image to see enlarged  version
of the official flyer for the 'Broken Paths'
art exhibit at Fairfield Halls in Croydon in
the South of London.

Between Monday 4th April - Saturday 16th April an art exhibition called "Broken Paths" will be open at the Sun Lounge at Fairfield Halls in Croydon (South London). A 'Main Event' will also be held during the exhibit on Friday 8th April between 2-5pm which will be a 'meet and greet' with all of the artists involved.

The Broken Paths art exhibition is being organised by Imagine mental health charity's Croydon branch and will be showcasing a selection of some of the creative talents of the mental health community in Croydon.

The artists featured in the exhibit are all at varying stages of recovery. And I am honoured to be among those having their work on display during Broken Paths.

Imagine mental health charity want to help those with mental illnesses live independently and improve our social inclusion. Imagine in Croydon has unique service user groups ("service user" being the phrase attributed to those of us who use the community's mental health services) which are service user led.

Broken Paths has been organised as part of the battle against stigma towards mental illness. Which meant Free Your Mind had to get involved with this art exhibition. As I've stated before, I genuinely do believe creativity and mental health effectively go hand-in-hand with one another.

The 'meet and greet' will be the "official" time to meet all of the artists, but I will be available during most of the exhibition promoting FYM. So be sure to come and find me! ((I'll be the short one dressed all in black - pretty much..))

Should you express an interest in buying any of the art on display at the exhibition, please contact Kato, from Imagine, by email: kwalmsley@imaginementalhealth.org.uk.

Join Free Your Mind and Imagine at Broken Paths for great art, to show your support and help us fight stigma and discrimination towards mental illnesses!

We hope to see you there!

(Nicola from FYM)

Directions to Fairfield Halls in Croydon:

Address:

Fairfield Halls is situated next to Croydon College on Park Lane in Croydon's town centre.

Park Lane, 

Croydon, 

Surrey 

CR9 1DG

Trains:

Fairfield is approximately 20 minutes by train from London’s Victoria and London Bridge stations. There are also fast regular services from Charing Cross and Waterloo.

East Croydon station is a 3 minute walk away and West Croydon station is about a 12 minute walk.

Bus Routes:

50 (from Stockwell), 60 (towards Old Coulsdon/Streatham), 75 (from Lewisham), 109 (from Brixton), 119 (towards Bromley North/Purley Way), 154 (from Morden), 166 (towards Banstead/Epsom), 197 (from Peckham), 250 (from Brixton), 264 (from Tooting), 312 (towards Norwood Junction/South Croydon), 403 (from Warlingham), 405 (from Redhill), 407 (towards Caterham/Sutton), 412 (from Purley), 455 (towards Old Lodge Lane/Wallington), 466 (towards Addington Village/Caterham-on-the-Hill), 468 (towards Elephant & Castle/South Croydon).

Trams:

The Tramlink which runs through the centre of Croydon stops at East Croydon, George Street and Wellesley Road which are all 3 minutes walk away. Imagine mental health charity -- http://www.imaginementalhealth.org.uk/ Croydon Imagine -- http://www.imaginementalhealth.org.uk/Croydon.php Fairfield Halls -- http://www.fairfield.co.uk/ Event Information on Facebook -- http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=170194913031578 'Broken Paths' art exhibit Twitter hash-tag: #BrokenPaths Imagine would like to apologise to both Free Your Mind and you for allowing incorrect information to be printed in their promotional material. ((Corrections have been made by FYM to this blog post to ammend Imagine's mistake.))

My Mental Illness Does Not Define Me!

Often when I tell people I have a mental illness they immediately want to know all of the specifics of my diagnosis. Admittedly this interest in my diagnosis could just be a general curiousity, but it all too often feels as if their interest stems from feeling they need to know the specifics in order to modify their behaviour toward me in some way.

As much as I'm all for advocating educating people about mental illness and mental health issues in order to reduce stigma - asking someone point blank about their diagnosis is not only a bit invasive (some people are willing to talk about their diagnosis, but normally on their own terms!), but also, more often than not, they may not actually know the specifics of their diagnosis. 

But, more to the point, when dealing with an individual, the specifics of their diagnosis is not of any importance, unless they are being placed under your care (in which case one wouldn't be required to specifically ask that person about their diagnosis). If you want to get to know someone, you get to know them - not their mental illness.

A person's personality; morals; intelligence; appearance; class; wealth; social status; friends; hobbies; actions; and so on, are not defined by their mental illness.

In other words; a person cannot be defined by their mental illness.

Sometimes when I tell people I have a mental illness they express surprise; some even go as far to say they do not believe me. I have questioned these people who say they don't believe me as to why they think that; the response, "You seem too normal", never fails to surprise me! 

Unfortunately, stigma towards mental health issues means people hold views that anyone with a mental illness should stick out from a mile away and are distinguishable from "normal folk" as they are busy "acting crazy". 

An ignorant view which is supported by most of the media: as soon as anyone does anything out of the ordinary they're labelled "crazy" or "mad"; even in the cases of murderers, etc. words like "psycho" or "nutter" are used - and then these same adjectives are attributed to those with mental illnesses!

Yes some really horrible people are mentally ill. But so are some of the most honest, decent, beautiful (not in the aesthetic sense) individuals you could ever hope to meet!

Having a mental illness does not define a person. Mental illness does not pertain to whether someone is a good person or not. Knowing a person's diagnosis is not largely useful when getting to know an individual; however, I do believe that educating yourself on mental health is a highly commendable idea. But a person will always be a whole lot more than their mental illness!

Should interviewer have given Charlie Sheen "bipolar diagnosis"?

Recent events involving Charlie Sheen have really disturbed me - when I say this I am actually talking about not only the media treatment of his mental illness, but, more specifically, why anyone would ever think it is okay to "diagnose" someone during a televised interview!
(See Below)


In the above interview Sheen is being interviewed and asked questions about his drug addiction. At the end of the interview the interviewer tells him that "psychologists" say he has bipolar.

My thoughts on this are that I feel it is highly irresponsible to take someone you believe to be seriously mentally ill and having a manic episode, interview them purely for "entertainment" purposes (I honestly can't see any other reason to conduct an interview such as this), and then "diagnose" them at the end of it.

The interviewer also talks of "psychologists" coming up with a bipolar diagnosis. This doesn't sit right with me. I'd genuinely would like to know who these "psychologists" are?! Psychologists can't (or, at least, shouldn't!) diagnose anyone without a proper assessment. Personally (please tell me if you disagree) I think  that to reach a "conclusive" diagnosis several assessments have to take place over periods of months or years.

And surely if a psychologist had diagnosed Sheen why would they be giving this information to an interviewer, and not to him personally or to someone else close to him???

If I were in the above situation, chances are I would have said the same or similar as Sheen.

Speaking as a recovered drug-addict with BPD (Borderline Personality Disorder), whom has also experienced manic episodes, I can honestly say Sheen's behavior in the above interview is pretty "normal"  for anyone suffering a manic episode or a bipolar "high". Also, before I did finally get sober, if you'd asked me then if I got high or if I thought I might relapse I would have denied it whatever the circumstances were. And as for trying to make me see I was ill or getting me to understand I could die - if it was back then - you could forget it!

Obviously Sheen is mentally ill - drug-addiction is in itself a mental illness - and he does appear to be on a manic bipolar high. But my big issue (the subject of this post) is with the irresponsibility of conducting the above interview and then claiming to have a diagnosis. As I said before, even if a trained psychologist/psychiatrist had been saying the same as this interviewer to me when I was manic and on drugs, it would have gone in one ear and out the other; therefore, I know if I were in the above situation, not only would the interview have pushed me further into denial but it would also have messed my head quite a bit. ((For example; a few years ago, whilst I was suffering a manic episode, my parents were asked to  keep notes on my behavior, and when I found these notes I was convinced my behavior was being recorded so that they could report back to the "government" whom I believed were studying me as part of a large-scale "experiment" that everyone else in the world was in on.))

Whatever you think of Sheen - it's not nice to see anyone suffer in this way.

I'm writing this after taking issue with what I believe to be a irresponsible way of treating someone with a mental illness. I could speculate Sheen's diagnosis - but I don't see the point. Or I could discuss the fact that anyone else (i.e. someone who isn't a Hollywood actor) is likely to have been sectioned by now - but I don't feel I could add anything to the discussion which hasn't been said before.

After watching the above interview, I strongly felt a need to express my thoughts on this. What do you think? Have I got a point? Or do you feel I'm going over-the-top?

Discussing Mental Illness on Internet Forums

Posting on internet forums can be an enjoyable past-time and it is one in which I engage in everyday more or less. But what about when the discussion turns towards mental illness?

Unfortunately, as everyone knows, internet forums are plagued with people posting ignorant and, sometimes, bigoted views. As I stick to the more friendlier forums I manage to avoid the worst of it. But I have found that mental illness is one subject guaranteed to cause "controversy" or produce, not necessarily discriminatory views, but views that still show a large degree of ignorance.

Sometimes these sort of comments on a forum can really upset some posters, turning the discussion into a flame-war. Other times these comments are ignored or the other posters fail to see the ignorance within the comment.

Personally, I'm never going to be reduced to flaming anyone. But at the same time I will speak up if someone has posted something I know not to be quite right.

I don't think subjects such as mental illness should be avoided as topics of discussion on internet forums. In fact, quite the opposite, discussing these subjects and enlightening those who don't know as much about this subject is a highly positive and healthy activity. However, flaming someone who doesn't agree with you (no matter how ignorant they are being) is not the way forward.

It's not right for mental illness to be a taboo subject. Discussion on mental health and the issues surrounding it are healthy. Just be prepared for a few small-minded people.

Comedy Sketch Encourages Stigma Towards Mental Illness?

Ofcom are investigating a complaint made by Rethink about a sketch on Frankie Boyle's Tramadol Nights programme on Channel Four. Rethink does not make a habit of criticising  comedy shows...

Back in December 2010, mental health charity Rethink lodged a complaint with Ofcom over a Frankie Boyle sketch shown on the Channel 4 show Tramadol Nights.

This has not been the only complaint made to Ofcom about Boyle's Channel 4 show, he is also under fire from AIDS and cancer charities over his television show.

The sketch parodies Time to Change's fake film trailer for a horror film called Schizo (which can be viewed in this previous blog post). The "Schizo trailer" ultimately shows someone with schizophrenia talking about their experiences while making tea in his kitchen.

In the Boyle sketch a man says he has mental health problems and comments on the stigma surrounding mental illness. The camera then pans down to show four children dead and covered in blood.

There was a time long gone when I used to laugh at Boyle's humor - now I feel all he is doing is trying to shock, which will inevitably encourage ignorance and stigma.

I have heard it argued that Boyle's humor is "done with irony" and "if you don't see that, you don't understand his humor". But, surely if others do not see the "ironic-humor", then there must be those who find Boyle humorous but see no irony and their laughs derive from prejudice and holding views of stigma towards mental illness!

The sketch could also be defended by calling it "satire". But I can use the same argument as above; too many are ignorant of subjects such as mental illness and will therefore fail to see the "satire", and will, mistakenly, see the sketch as "depicting the truth."

Unfortunately, the comedy sketch reinforces the myth that mental illness causes a sufferer to be violent; which of course is not true.

Mark Davies, Rethink's director of communications, in a letter to Ofcom said: "There is no causal link between mental illness and violence. In fact, people with mental illness are more likely to be the victims than  the perpetrators of violence.


"By inferring that people with mental illness are violent, the Frankie Boyle sketch was misleading. One in four people have a mental health problem at some point in their lives. This sketch caused offence to many people in this group."


Speaking as someone with a mental disorder, it worries me that laughs are being derived from the ignorance   in believing there is a causal link between violence and mental health problems. It worries me that Boyle's sketch could help to reinforce stigma towards mental illness.

What do you think?

The FYM 'Creative Bank'

The Free Your Mind Creative Bank was created with the intention of showcasing creativity - including art, poetry, videos, poetry, etc. - related to mental illness or FYM.

The Creative Bank will be constantly updated. And we more than welcome contributions; email us at freeyourmindcampaign@gmail.com.

The latest additions are:

New poem...

This doesn’t make any sense,
Why are they still shouting at me?
Their anger is unclear
And their motives seem strange

My vision is blurred
As I look through stormy eyes

There is no doubt I’ve done nothing wrong
And in my heart I know they’re afraid.

They want to make me feel ashamed
And deny our similarities
But right now I feel as if I’m gazing at their souls.
Whilst they continue to stare straight through me.

My skin is thicker than it looks
My pride is hard to infiltrate

My body and mind are tired
My fight and will remain strong

My defences are raised
As they declare war.

There is no doubt
That they will batter me to the ground.
But at the core I shall remain
Undefeated.

Art...

Visit the Creative Bank here.

Representation of Mental Illness on TV

Representation of mental illness on TV has never been the most sensitive, accurate or sympathetic. But have improvements been made?

Recently a study was published by Shift, the government initiative to tackle stigma and discrimination surrounding mental health issues in England, which found that, despite distinct improvements over recent years, prime time television drama continues to struggle to present an accurate picture of mental illness.

The report found that:

• 63% of references to mental health were flippant, unsympathetic, or showed a low opinion about the sufferer
• 45% of TV programmes shown at peak time with mental illness story-lines portrayed people with mental health problems as posing a threat to others
• 45% of programmes had sympathetic portrayals of mental illness, but these often portrayed the characters as tragic victims.

All too often characters in hit prime-time TV shows deliver flippant lines in reference to mental illness, including things like; "crackpot", "basket case", and "sad little psycho".

Eastender's was praised for it's
portrayal of mental illness
with character Stacey Slater

Admittedly, progress has been made in some television shows. BBC soap Eastenders was praised for its portrayal of bipolar disorder with the character of Stacey Slater. However, even in this case. the same character eventually committed murder.

The depiction of another character with bipolar disorder on Channel 4 drama Shameless was both accurate and sensitive - which it, deservedly, was highly praised for. (Although this programme still showed the same character attacking her partner.)

In both of the above cases, however, it could be argued that violence and mental illness were used together in order to create tragic drama.

Vincent and the Doctor

Of all the recent portrayals of mental illness on television I found Doctor Who's depiction of Vincent van Gogh, the famous painter whom suffered from depression and eventually committed suicide, to have been the most sensitive and sympathetic. Despite the tragic nature of the character's story, the show still presented a positive and uplifting view of mental illness.

Although significant improvements have been made to the representations of mental illness and mental health issues in recent years, there is still a lot of progress to be made.