On a more serious note:
I know that the media is desperate to report something about the movie theater shooting, but I’m really annoyed by the current headline that’s making the rounds:
CNN: Colorado suspect was seeing a psychiatrist
FoxNews: Court papers reveal Colorado shooting suspect was seeing psychiatrist
NYTimes: Colorado suspect was getting psychiatric care
ABCnews: Colo. suspect was seeing a shrink
I find this reporting horribly offensive, irresponsible and damaging. We know NOTHING about what he was seeing a psychiatrist about. NOTHING AT ALL. Nothing has been released. And yet it’s being reported everywhere, because the media (and our society as a whole) has decided that seeing a psychiatrist is a sign of a deranged mind. “Aha!” says America! “He was seeing a psychiatrist! That explains SO MUCH!”
But it doesn’t explain anything, because seeing a psychiatrist is not a damning sign of craziness, or a precursor to murderous behavior, or a conclusive sign of ANYTHING AT ALL.
Legitimate, non-murderous reasons real people might see a psychiatrist (not comprehensive):
Eating disorders
Claustrophobia
Generalized Anxiety
OCD
Depression
Sleepwalking
Alzheimer’s
Mourning
Substance abuse
Nightmares
Perfectionism
Dyslexia
Pathological Gambling
Stuttering
Panic Disorder and Agoraphobia (like me)
My point: So the Colorado shooter was seeing a psychiatrist; SO WHAT? Implying that seeing a psychiatrist is relevant to this case–WHEN NO FACTS ARE KNOWN–paints every person with a mental illness as a potential mass murder. Which is BULLCRAP.
This is why people are afraid of admitting to mental illness. It’s why very sick people refuse to get help–because they’re afraid of the stigma.
It was GOOD that this shooter was seeing a psychiatrist. I have no idea what the reason for his visits were, but seeing a psychiatrist meant he was trying to get help. I wish MORE people were willing to see psychiatrists. But that’s not going to happen as long as society views psychiatric patients as ticking time bombs. So STOP IT.
Variant, named as one of Publisher's Weekly's Best Books of 2012. A YALSA Pick for Reluctant Readers. Click here for more information.
Feedback, sequel to Variant, was released October 2nd, 2012. Click here for more information.
Blackout, a new series coming October 2013. Click here for more information.
Going Dark is a novella prequel to Blackout, to be released September 3rd, 2013. Click here for more information.
I didn’t have a problem with that headline, but I didn’t read it as “SO WE KNOW HE WAS CRAZY”. I saw it as another fact, one I’d been very curious about — had he gotten any help before this point? And the fact that yes, he had, just reminds us that you can’t completely prevent random acts of insanity.
I’ve been seeing shrinkiatrists for… well, decades, now that I think about it. The stigma has been greatly reduced.
Hmm. But the fact that you read it that way means other people will too, and that may contribute to more stigma-tizing. And that kinda sucks.
I feel very bad for the poor shrink, who is no doubt wondering what she could have done to prevent this. SHE probably needs a shrink now.
I agree. As a forensic psychologist I have told too many people that we know nothing about whether he had a serious mental illness, having a mental illness does not predict or make you violent or aggressive and that being a mass murderer does not make you “crazy.” I have friends wanting to essentially “tag” individuals who suffer from an illness so they can’t buy firearms, or just so they can be watched.
I find it horrible how the press has jumped on these issues with gleeful abandon. None of the stories I have read discuss the nearly 20 years of solid research that says that having a mental illness does not increase your risk or level of violence. They just keep supporting (directly or indirectly) the stereotypes.
Good Rant.
I don’t disagree with Rob’s general thesis that seeing a psychiatrist is not, in and of itself, useful informtion.
But, there are important legal/policy implications raised by this information. As is the case with every terrible shooting, there are questions as to whether or not the shooter should have had access to a firearm and whether or not the laws need to be changed to prevent people like him from getting access in the future.
Under federal law, someone who has been adjudicated either to be a danger to himself or others or lacking in mental capacity cannot legally own a firearm. If it can be shown that his psychiatric care should have led to such an adjudication — that his doctor should have referred him, etc. — then it’s relevant to the overall policy debate.
That’s how I read the coverage of this issue. It’s not a salacious revelation — “Oooh! Look how crazy this guy is!” — but a discussion of a relevant legal fact.
I say this as someone who also sees a psychiatrist.
You are right. You should also do a Feedback ARC contest.
I saw your blog from Julianne D. I just want to say thank you for this post. My husband is a in his fourth year in medical school and he is applying for a Psychiatry Residency. It is not only a stigma among the general public but it is a joke in med school (at least in my husband’s school). You get two kinds of doctors. Ones who really care about the welfare of people’s mental state which you are nothing without, or you have guy who didn’t do well on boards who take that because no one else wants to adding to more stigma. It is so sad.
I got so irritated with the media for that and a criminologist saying she wasn’t surprised that he was a neuroscience major (my husband has his BA in Neuroscience). Contrary to popular belief not all people who study the brain or behavioral sciences have mental issues.
Thank you for posting this. I fear we will never leave that stigma and people like you mentioned will be afraid to get help and will miss out on a quality life!