Reply
Sun 29 Mar, 2015 11:27 pm
Context:
It is clear that we cannot distinguish the sane from the insane in psychiatric hospitals. The hospital itself imposes a special environment in which the meanings of behavior can easily be misunderstood. The consequences to patients hospitalized in such an environment—the powerlessness, depersonalization, segregation, mortification, and self-labeling—seem undoubtedly countertherapeutic.
I do not, even now, understand this problem well enough to perceive solutions. But two matters seem to have some promise. The first concerns the proliferation of community mental health facilities, of crisis intervention centers, of the human potential movement, and of behavior therapies that, for all of their own problems, tend to avoid psychiatric labels, to focus on specific problems and behaviors, and to retain the individual in a relatively non-pejorative environment. Clearly, to the extent that we refrain from sending the distressed to insane places, our impressions of them are less likely to be distorted. (The risk of distorted perceptions, it seems to me, is always present, since we are much more sensitive to an individual's behaviors and verbalizations than we are to the subtle contextual stimuli that often promote them. At issue here is a matter of magnitude. And, as I have shown, the magnitude of distortion is exceedingly high in the extreme context that is a psychiatric hospital.)
@oristarA,
More like to think up solutions yourself, rather than recognize external solutions, I think. It's a little ambiguous to me.
@FBM,
Thanks.
Does "for all of their own problems" mean "regarless of their own flaws (the defects in the facilities, centers, movement and behavior therapies)"?
Context:
" The first concerns the proliferation of community mental health facilities, of crisis intervention centers, of the human potential movement, and of behavior therapies that,
for all of their own problems, tend to avoid psychiatric labels, to focus on specific problems and behaviors, and to retain the individual in a relatively non-pejorative environment. "?
@oristarA,
oristarA wrote:
oristarA wrote:
Thanks.
Does "for all of their own problems" mean "regarless of their own flaws (the defects in the facilities, centers, movement and behavior therapies)"?
Context:
" The first concerns the proliferation of community mental health facilities, of crisis intervention centers, of the human potential movement, and of behavior therapies that, for all of their own problems, tend to avoid psychiatric labels, to focus on specific problems and behaviors, and to retain the individual in a relatively non-pejorative environment. "?
Yes, this is correct.
Quote: If so, does "Clearly, to the extent that we refrain from sending the distressed to insane places, our impressions of them are less likely to be distorted" mean "our impressions of the facilities, centers (the insane places) are clear (not distorted); we are vigilant - so as to the extent that we do not send the distressed people there"?
Let's see:
Our impressions of them are less likely to be distorted to the extent that we refrain from sending the distressed to insane places.
To paraphrase: The less we send distressed people to insane places, the less distorted our impression of them will be [to outsiders].
That is, if they send distressed people to insane places, others will get the impression that they approve of those insane places more than they really do. The distorting would be done by the outsiders who would get the wrong idea.
@FBM,
FBM wrote:
oristarA wrote:
oristarA wrote:
Thanks.
Does "for all of their own problems" mean "regarless of their own flaws (the defects in the facilities, centers, movement and behavior therapies)"?
Context:
" The first concerns the proliferation of community mental health facilities, of crisis intervention centers, of the human potential movement, and of behavior therapies that, for all of their own problems, tend to avoid psychiatric labels, to focus on specific problems and behaviors, and to retain the individual in a relatively non-pejorative environment. "?
Yes, this is correct.
Quote: If so, does "Clearly, to the extent that we refrain from sending the distressed to insane places, our impressions of them are less likely to be distorted" mean "our impressions of the facilities, centers (the insane places) are clear (not distorted); we are vigilant - so as to the extent that we do not send the distressed people there"?
Let's see:
Our impressions of them are less likely to be distorted to the extent that we refrain from sending the distressed to insane places.
To paraphrase: The less we send distressed people to insane places, the less distorted our impression of them will be [to outsiders].
That is, if they send distressed people to insane places, others will get the impression that they approve of those insane places more than they really do. The distorting would be done by the outsiders who would get the wrong idea.
Thank you FBM.
I think my understanding of it got improved, but I still failed to get a clear picture.
Does "insane places" refer to "psychiatric hospitals"? If we refraim from sending the distressed people there, how can we cure them?
@oristarA,
oristarA wrote:
Thank you FBM.
I think my understanding of it got improved, but I still failed to get a clear picture.
Does "insane places" refer to "psychiatric hospitals"? If we refraim from sending the distressed people there, how can we cure them?
It doesn't mean legitimate psychiatric hospitals, it refers to: community mental health facilities, of crisis intervention centers, of the human potential movement, and of behavior therapies. These places are often not staffed with fully qualified mental health professionals.
The feeling I get is that the author is implying a complaint that there aren't enough full-service psychiatric hospitals, so there is often no choice but to send patients to lower-quality treatment venues. The author wants to point out that they have no choice but to send them there, and hopes that the public doesn't misunderstand/distort that as an endorsement of those facilities.
@FBM,
FBM wrote:
oristarA wrote:
Thank you FBM.
I think my understanding of it got improved, but I still failed to get a clear picture.
Does "insane places" refer to "psychiatric hospitals"? If we refraim from sending the distressed people there, how can we cure them?
It doesn't mean legitimate psychiatric hospitals, it refers to: community mental health facilities, of crisis intervention centers, of the human potential movement, and of behavior therapies. These places are often not staffed with fully qualified mental health professionals.
The feeling I get is that the author is implying a complaint that there aren't enough full-service psychiatric hospitals, so there is often no choice but to send patients to lower-quality treatment venues. The author wants to point out that they have no choice but to send them there, and hopes that the public doesn't misunderstand/distort that as an endorsement of those facilities.
If so, how to understand what the author said in following text:
Quote:At issue here is a matter of magnitude. And, as I have shown, the magnitude of distortion is exceedingly high in the extreme context that is a psychiatric hospital.
@oristarA,
I could be wrong about the author's implied message. Would you mind give me more context surrounding that last quote?
@oristarA,
Quote:If so, does "Clearly, to the extent that we refrain from sending the distressed to insane places, our impressions of them are less likely to be distorted" mean "our impressions of the facilities, centers (the insane places) are clear (not distorted); we are vigilant - so as to the extent that we do not send the distressed people there"?
No, I don't think it means that. If you read the first paragraph, he is arguing that the setting itself creates all kinds of distortion in what would otherwise be the "typical" behavior of those "inmates." [He says: "It is clear that we cannot distinguish the sane from the insane in psychiatric hospitals. The hospital itself imposes a special environment..."]
The way I read it the "them" is the patients, not the facilities. He saying that if you (the therapist) don't see them in mental hospitals, then you are less likely to get a distorted view of the patients (because the hospital setting itself distorts their behavior).
@FBM,
FBM wrote:
I could be wrong about the author's implied message. Would you mind give me more context surrounding that last quote?
The full context is here:
(The article is packaged into a pdf file. I downloaded it and it seems safe and okay to me)
http://www.walnet.org/llf/ROSENHAN-BEINGSANE.PDF
@layman,
Cool.
So the "insane places" refers to "psychiatric hospitals"?
@oristarA,
Yes it does. A bad choice of words.
"Clearly, to the extent that we refrain from sending the distressed to insane places, our impressions of them are less likely to be distorted"
Yes, I can see that now. The pronoun "them" is placed a bit ambiguously. It can be read to mean either "the distressed" or "insane places," but with more context available, it's starting to look like it means the former.
Selected Answer
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace