The Carlat Psychiatry Blog has an excellent and I think courageous post titled “The APA: Power, and the Exclusion of Dissent” that provides a couple of examples of professionals in the field of psychiatry/mental health who blog being “shunned” by colleagues for voicing their opinions or allowing the dissenting comments of others onto their sites. There is always the danger of group think in any endeavor or where an organization is assembled to meet the complex challenges of our time. Nowhere is this more apparent than in issues related to mental health where the processes of identifying who has a mental illness, why the illness exists, and which form of treatment works or not are so difficult to assess.

We are dealing with many unknowns when it comes to disorders of the mind. This is why it is so important to challenge the status quo in these fields. When I decided to step off of the path to become a licensed clinical psychologist and instead seek a way to challenge the systems and myths associated with the field of mental health it was because I realized I could not effectively use my voice to challenge the status quo from the inside. Through my own experiences, witnessing the experiences of others, extensive research, and working in the field I came to realize how flawed the system of mental health is and where if it is going to be effective and healing it needs to change. With a Master’s degree in Organizational/Systems Management and a PhD in Mythological Studies with an emphasis in Depth Psychology I set out to find a way to help others and myself see and find another way of determining how “disturbed” or “sick” are individuals and the culture. This blog is a testament to this ongoing commitment and process of discovery.

The decision to find another way of looking at mental health and the culture is not my attempt to negate the field, but instead to push it to be more specifically focused on determining who in fact is suffering from mental illness and needs treatment. The harm of misdiagnosing and the wasting of precious resources that is being caused by casting what I call too broad a net over the culture in terms of psychiatric diagnoses and treatment is where the voices of dissent need to be. Organizations like the APA must be challenged, especially from within, regarding what is not working and how the system is failing because they have so much power. But unfortunately, my decision to not become a clinical psychologist was based on how I believed at the time that I would not be able to voice my dissent about the diagnostic model and fragmented methods of treatment because I would be licensed to adhere to them. I struggle with the merits of this decision to this day. My goal, however, to combine an outsider’s voice with an insider’s knowledge of the systems remains unchanged.