sip15
New Member
Posts: 4
|
May 15, 2015 15:21:27 GMT
Post by sip15 on May 15, 2015 15:21:27 GMT
I don't remember being taught about mental health at all. Everything I've learned about it, including a lot of misinformation, has been through the media and then, when I started to question what I was seeing there, my own research, which has been enlightening but isolating and overwhelming. I'm really not sure where to start in terms of self-care and supporting others. There is not only a lot of misinformation, but suppressed information; research and treatment are still being curated by a well-monied establishment of elites who are interested in retaining and augmenting their own power so I'm not sure what of what I read to trust and what to question. Seems important, on some level, to question everything, but who has energy for that? What is considered "valid" in the land of affective "disorders?" Who decides what's normal? I'm not saying that education is the answer to all the problems; sometimes, the problem isn't ignorance. How can we tell good research from bad when so much about the source of funding, the sponsors, etc., is, much like our political system, concealed and we have an either apathetic or militantly misinformed public? And where will meaningful reform come from if saying any of what I've said here gets me epithetically labeled a "radical"?
|
|
|
|
May 17, 2015 14:32:43 GMT
Post by Admin on May 17, 2015 14:32:43 GMT
When I was younger, probably around middle school, I remember I was in science class and the teacher had just finished explaining a story of how some new scientific evidence (I forget the specifics) had come along and made clear that everything that 99% of scientists believed about this one particular topic had been totally wrong. I remember raising my hand and asking "but if new evidence can come along at any time and disprove everything like that, how do you know everything you're teaching us is true?", to which she replied, "oh, probably some of what I'm teaching you isn't true, probably MOST of it isn't true". One student in particular felt extremely betrayed by this and became somewhat upset.
What comes up for me as I contemplate your response is concern about teaching anything in terms of ultimate reality. How do we bring people up to speed in a way that is useful without cramming any particular worldview into people's heads? And how do we do this without turning grade school health class into a college level science/psychology/statistics/poly-sci/philosophy class?
There is, of course, no one easy answer to this. One thing that I've found useful is to approach things from a more journalistic/historical angle. This means making statements like "many scientists today believe XYZ" instead of "XYZ". It would mean presenting the DSM as a constantly changing set of diagnostic criteria, written by psychiatrists who generally believe such a document helps make helping professions more effective. It would mean talking about antidepressants as a common first-line treatment, rather than the most effective treatment our society has or the one that should be tried first.
In terms of creating curriculum space for specific treatments, I think there is an important discussion to be had as to to what extent this should be attempted, if at all. Personally I have not made up my mind on the issue. The one thing that I do think it is important to impart to students, however, is that all sorts of treatments and management strategies and peer supports EXIST for everything that is discussed. It is just a question of how to get that message across in a way that is helpful and empowering. This means making students aware of the potential risks many treatments come with and encouraging students to think rationally and critically about what is the best path for them.
|
|
