In the US, Trauma-Informed Care sells itself as being about compassion and sensitivity toward the survivor of trauma and abuse. The discerning eye will take notice that it is a pernicious offensive against the biological basis of the serious brain disorders the medical profession calls serious mental illness. There is another belief system about the nature of mental illness itself that often underlies Trauma-Informed Care, the notion that mental illness itself is a myth and that many of the symptoms are natural human reactions to trauma and abuse. It is preposterous to believe that some of the severe and disabling symptoms of a disorder such as schizophrenia (known as one of the worst disorders known to mankind) or Bipolar are natural reactions to trauma or abuse. The vast majority of human beings have been subjected to trauma of some kind so why are most of us not suffering from mania or psychosis?
Across the pond, in January of 2018, the launch of another iteration of the same belief system – On steroids.
A self advocacy group in the UK described a clinical encounter in which they were presented with a preliminary questionnaire that contained questions that served to explore what had happened to them in the childhood. The advocates were critical of the fact that the first set of questions seem to be constructed to prime them to produce evidence of trauma or abuse. The fifth question finally asked the patient to reveal what happened to them during their childhood.
The mental illness system of care and treatment is already in disarray. People with these predominantly hereditary disorders deserve to have their illnesses understood. When these neurological illnesses are denied as being what they truly are, this ultimately leads to iatrogenic harm, bad public health policies, and criminalization.
Here is a link to a commentary by Mental Illness Policy Org about anti-psychiatry:
And another that provides further insight into various belief systems about mental illness that underlie antipsychiatry.
Imagine state government credentialling institutions that define recovery from cancer as follows:
A deeply personal journey away from fear and hopelessness toward self-determinism where health and well-being is not symptom-focused and is not defined by remission of malignancy.
Yet, State and Federal government have made this deceptive and bizarre concept the core principle of their institutional policies that govern care for citizens with serious mental illness.