as someone in a position to offer professional diagnoses, here’s my perspective - diagnostic labels can be useful, and i view them mostly as tools. their utility to me might be to communicate to another professional a cluster of traits, behaviors, indicators i’m seeing in short-hand. it might be helpful in determining which approaches could bring relief.
it can also be helpful in validating an individual’s subjective experiences, like “oh, everything is hard right now because i am dealing with depression, i’m not actually a worthless piece of shit.'” it’s also helpful to me when someone shares a self-diagnosis - i can explore what they think that means, and sometimes they’re right on the money. sometimes it means “i don’t feel i am coping effectively.”
sometimes they’re not right, but the label they have adopted can offer hints as to what’s not working. a word like autism can mean “i have a hard time connecting to others or communicating,” and maybe a another label is more appropriate or maybe the issue is their social environment.
some diagnostic labels can be verified objectively and scientifically, but in practice many are based on self-report/informant-report/observation and best fit. the fact is that diagnosis is often as much art as science when it comes to mental health, and the best diagnosis is the one that leads to improved well-being.
of course, some folks don’t like labels at all. “i’m just myself.” if they are generally happy, healthy, and functioning well, i don’t mind that either.
tldr - diagnostic labels are helpful tools that can be useful in a variety of ways.
caveat - diagnostic labels can be dangerous when they interfere with well-being or efforts toward well-being, or when they are used to harm, control, or oppress.
Thanks for this statement. I read it as “diagnostic labels are a tool supposed to be used in professional communication but it may be harmful when used otherwise”.
IMO, much of that harm could be avoided by just not pathologizing and labeling personal caracteristics as “disorders”, though, which are characteristics certain societies could greatly benefit from if such people would just be given the right respect and task.
as someone in a position to offer professional diagnoses, here’s my perspective - diagnostic labels can be useful, and i view them mostly as tools. their utility to me might be to communicate to another professional a cluster of traits, behaviors, indicators i’m seeing in short-hand. it might be helpful in determining which approaches could bring relief.
it can also be helpful in validating an individual’s subjective experiences, like “oh, everything is hard right now because i am dealing with depression, i’m not actually a worthless piece of shit.'” it’s also helpful to me when someone shares a self-diagnosis - i can explore what they think that means, and sometimes they’re right on the money. sometimes it means “i don’t feel i am coping effectively.”
sometimes they’re not right, but the label they have adopted can offer hints as to what’s not working. a word like autism can mean “i have a hard time connecting to others or communicating,” and maybe a another label is more appropriate or maybe the issue is their social environment.
some diagnostic labels can be verified objectively and scientifically, but in practice many are based on self-report/informant-report/observation and best fit. the fact is that diagnosis is often as much art as science when it comes to mental health, and the best diagnosis is the one that leads to improved well-being.
of course, some folks don’t like labels at all. “i’m just myself.” if they are generally happy, healthy, and functioning well, i don’t mind that either.
tldr - diagnostic labels are helpful tools that can be useful in a variety of ways.
caveat - diagnostic labels can be dangerous when they interfere with well-being or efforts toward well-being, or when they are used to harm, control, or oppress.
Thanks for this statement. I read it as “diagnostic labels are a tool supposed to be used in professional communication but it may be harmful when used otherwise”.
IMO, much of that harm could be avoided by just not pathologizing and labeling personal caracteristics as “disorders”, though, which are characteristics certain societies could greatly benefit from if such people would just be given the right respect and task.