As we reported last week (as did others), antipsychotics are not really a good treatment option for aggressive behavior, based upon the findings from a recently published study in the journal Lancet. Which begs the question: When were they ever?
Sadly, antipsychotics are not the first medications ever to be used to basically sedate people, so they would be more manageable to the individuals and organizations charged with their care. The use of psychiatric and other medications for control of behaviors, rather than treatment of diseases or disorders, has a long history.
Time and time again, research shows that it’s the human relationship we share with one another that have a significant, perhaps the most significant impact, in how we feel. And how we feel has an impact on our treatment and feeling better.
Yet, the first thing we do as a society is to cut the resources and funding for people to help other people. We turn to short-cuts, like medications, to help us do more for less. But in reality, we end up doing less for less, and probably causing more harm to the people we are charged with caring for.
Say you’re a county mental health system. Every year, you’re expected to see more and more people who need care and help for serious mental disorders. But do you get more money or resources to pay for this increasing need? No. In fact, every year for the past 5 or 6 years, government programs like Medicaid and Medicare have actually tried to cut what they’re willing to pay for treatment. Local governments certainly have no more money, at least where I live, as they are constantly cutting back on services.
So what do you do? You look to make do with what you have. And if that means ordering your psychiatrists to prescribe more medications and less psychotherapy or other therapeutic intervention programs because there are no professionals to staff them, then you do it. You do it because otherwise you’d be turning people away. Most people in our field feel that “anything” is better than no treatment at all.
But studies like the Lancet study show that, in fact, no treatment at all is no better than the medications (in this case, for a very specific symptom: aggressive behavior). What seems to have made the difference in the participants’ lives in the study wasn’t the pill they took, but their interaction with another human being. Someone who showed they cared, took the time to listen to the person’s complaints, and talked to them. Like an individual. Like we would all like to be spoken to when we’re stressed out or dealing with the most difficult issues in our lives.
What’s the Answer to Overmedicating?
It’s the same old, same old you’ve heard me say before. Mental health treatment and care in the U.S. needs more funding, more focus, and more facts. We need more funding across the board, not just for more research (as is the common call), but for more services to be provided to those in need and can’t always afford them. We need to fulfill the promise of John F. Kennedy’s vision for community mental health centers, a promise he made over 40 years ago. And one that is sadly still far from a reality in most communities. I believe that if treatment providers had the resources they needed, they would seek to provide the best treatments possible to their patients (and they should be rewarded for doing so). It wouldn’t be hard for me to imagine implementing a program that provided incentives for professionals not to medicate patients (especially for off-label, non-FDA approved uses) to control behaviors.
We need more of a focus of our mental health policy in society. Today it’s all over the place. Our governments — both federal and local — all have their own agenda and it seems they really don’t even talk to one another much. It would be nice to see that change.
Mental health needs to be better understood and written about by the mainstream media. When writing about mental disorders, we need to stick to the facts, and be clear when we’re talking about theories versus what we know as being true today (based upon the scientific literature).
Mental disorders like depression, bipolar disorder and schizophrenia are not simple “brain diseases,” nor are they caused by a chemical imbalance in the brain. It’s time to put those myths to rest once and for all. Let’s publish our real knowledge — that we don’t yet know what causes these disorders — and move on to the more important issues, Here’s how we can help you with this, though. Our knowledge about the cause of mental disorders is limited, but our knowledge of effective treatments for these disorders is extensive.
Studies like the one published last week should be a wake-up call that we shouldn’t be using medications as an alternative to the one-on-one relationships with people who need care and treatment.
13 comments
This is so true! The promises made have not been kept, and I suspect it is due to the stigma still ignorantly attached to mental illness. So few people seem to understand that there is no difference between having depression, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, or any other “mental illness” and having the flu or diabetes or any other “physical” illness. I mean, where is the brain housed? I know MINE is housed in my body; there are a few out there, though, that have me wondering about THEIRS. Once society accepts that illness is illness, regardless of if it’s the pancreas or brain, then maybe we will begin to see some inprovement in psychiatric care. Until then, psychiatry will remain the unwanted, ignored child of the family of medicine.
I agree with this to many times people are pushed aside as though we were some type of life stock. Instead of looking at people as individuals and that is where the medication just gets handed out.
I suffer from manic depression and I also have a lot of back problems and I used to think that it was just stories I was being told when others would complain about their doctors but it is true I rarely get heard just it needs more time to take effect or lets up the dose or give you more or try another never once lets talk and figure it out I am sure they do not have all the answers but it is their job I thought to provide care for their patients not just what is easiest. I know I have a long road ahead of me and getting better but I know that I can do it and I have insightpros.com to help me along with family and friends!
I agree wholeheartedly with what you’re saying here. You’ve hit the nail on the proverbial head. However, I’m slightly taken off guard by the following statement:
“Mental disorders like depression, bipolar disorder and schizophrenia are not “brain diseases,†nor are they caused by a chemical imbalance in the brain. It’s time to put those myths to rest once and for all.”
I’m really interested in reading some more literature that supports this claim. Do you think you could provide a link to either external sources or other posts on this site? Thanks!
How can you say:
“Mental disorders like depression, bipolar disorder and schizophrenia are not “brain diseases,†nor are they caused by a chemical imbalance in the brain. It’s time to put those myths to rest once and for all.†when in your website you say that “…schizophrenia is better understood as a brain disease that requires ongoing treatment. Demystification of the illness, along with recent insights from basic neuroscience, gives new hope for finding more effective treatments for an illness that previously carried a grave prognosis.”?
The word “simple” was left out of the final copy of this entry, which was in an earlier draft. It has been put back in.
The key take-away is this — mental disorders are complex phenomenon that we don’t really understand all that well. Education should be honest about our limited knowledge about causations, in contrast to our extensive knowledge about treatments.
This is a good article – it’s encouraging to see you refuting the “chemical imbalance” theory and using the word “disorder” rather than “disease”. This type of language is more realistic because what is being diagnosed, after all, is behavior and mental distress as described by the patient, not any kind of observable organic problem. I think that acknowledging these limitations on what is known tends to encourage the inclusion of mentally distressed people in the larger society, rather than excluding them as some kind of fundamentally different “other”.
Most people with psychiatric diagnoses aren’t all that different from everyone else, and taking the time and trouble to understand them as individuals is more likely to help them than the kind of mass processing that usually passes for mental health treatment. The concept of a mind being “sick” makes about as much sense to me as saying that a soul is “sick”. Both may be useful metaphors, but it’s important to remember that they aren’t referring to actual physical realities.
Interesting debate – that I’m happy to see still occurs. I actually decided a long time ago that the over-use of medication (anti-psychotics in particular) was a reason that I didn’t want to go into psychiatry as a profession. Everyone knows someone they would “dub” psychotic and I have far too much success in talking to the so-called psychotic and reaching that “human” aspect of them. When I was a teenager, I used to wonder about talking to a “true” psychotic, someone who has already been diagnosed. While it is true that the situation could fly out of your control and you could lose your life, I refuse to believe that medicating is the answer to all types of psychosis. As an adult, I’ve found it is quite possible to reach what I call a common ground aspect, but only if you can remove the element of fear that the person who’s suffering the psychosis has (the fear triggers fight/flight and one in throes of psychosis needs to choose to feel balanced again – when fear isn’t eliminated, they generally choose to fight being that flight isn’t an option due to current laws stating these people must be detained “for their own good”). To me, the million dollar question is “How do you remove the fear?” The answer I’ve decided on is that it is definitely very different for every human being out there. I’d love to see a study on the research of how people overcome fear – deeper than the “I just faced it and overcame it” aspect. In my humble opinion, it may unlock some of the unanswered questions we have about psychotics.
In response to the posts…I don’t necessarily agree with the idea of it being an illness. Not everyone needs to be “normal” in your eyes, nor do we need cookie cutter personalities. It’s an illness only when it’s been accepted as one – and not all “mentally ill” will give in and accept. I honestly believe that most people we regard as truly genius would be branded “mentally ill” and that had they accepted that versus just accepting they were “different” they would have been limited severely on their ability to develop their “illness” into something truly positive that added to the advancement of the society you live in today. Just a thought.
I DON’T LIKE THE LABELING FACTOR AT ALL, WHY LABEL PEOPLE AS SICK, MENTALLY ILL,CONFUSED,
PSYCHOTIC’S, CRAZY, LOONY, WHAT EVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT, IT’S WRONG!!! WHY CAN’T IT BE WE ALL JUST NEED HELP FROM TIME TO TIME. WHY GIVE IT A LABEL. FROM WHAT I’VE LEARNED LABEL’S ONLY HURT A PERSON MORE BECAUSE IF THEY ARE LABELED THERE NOT SO CALLED “NORMAL!”
WHAT IS NORMAL? DOES ANYONE HAVE THE CORRECT MEANING OF NORMAL, BECAUSE WHAT SOME FEEL IS NORMAL OTHER’S DO NOT! THE STIGMA BEHIND ALL THIS IS HORRIBLE!!! WHEN A PERSON GET’S SUCH A LABEL HOW ARE THEY TO DEAL WITH IT, WHEN SOCIETY TURN’S THERE BACK AND SHUT’S THE DOOR!
I THINK LABEL’S SUCH AS THE ONE’S USED HERE SHOULD BE THROWN IN THE TRASH WERE THEY BELONG, SO EVERYONE CAN GO ON LIVING WITHOUT THE FEAR OF BEING LABELED AND LOOKED DOWN ON BECAUSE SOCIETY DOESN’T WANT TO EXCEPT A PERSON WITH SUCH A LABEL AND IF YOU DON’T BELIEVE ME GIVE YOURSELF ONE OF THESE LABEL’S AND SEE HOW PEOPLE TREAT YOU!!! LABEL’S ARE WHAT I WOULD CALL NOT NORMAL!!!