10 ms·

I definitely agree that scientific understanding mental health is pretty low, but I don't believe the methodologies are flawed. They are the best we have at the

I definitely agree that scientific understanding mental health is pretty low, but I don't believe the methodologies are flawed. They are the best we have at the moment and they work well enough for the common cases. (Drugs vs therapy is a different problem.) Anyone with a non-trivial case ends up in informed (or poorly-informed) guesses territory. > Most things are actually just reactions to trauma. I don't think this is quite correct. Mental illnesses have a lot of overlapping and contradictory criteria because all of the categories are rough patterns. Many share the same symptoms of trauma and people with mental illness are more likely to have trauma. This does not mean the majority of mental illness is caused by traumatic events.

mountainriver 5y ago
They work okay for some basic cases. My experience and the experience of folks I've talked to they just seem like a charade mostly. Again anecdotal, but every person I know (including myself) with some sort of mental illness has ultimately just been due to trauma. I'm sure there are other things that happen, but too many therapists jump over that toward some other diagnosis that's just a symptom, then have some specific treament/medication for that DSM-5 diagnosis. I finally found a therapist that explained this to me and really dug in on what had happened in my life and I finally began processing it and I'm now better. This is after seeing ~7 different therapists and having ~10 diagnosis.