Educational Attainment and its Relationship to Singaporean Clergymen's Belief Models About Mental Illness Causation

2010 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mathew Mathews
2019 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 652-659 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seth A. Seabury ◽  
Sarah Axeen ◽  
Gwyn Pauley ◽  
Bryan Tysinger ◽  
Danielle Schlosser ◽  
...  

1976 ◽  
Vol 21 (6) ◽  
pp. 361-369 ◽  
Author(s):  
Moises Gaviria ◽  
Ronald M. Wintrob

Puerto Ricans living in urban areas of North-Eastern United States, whether patients or randomly selected residents of the community, differ very little in their conception of the causes of mental illness. They distinguish two broad categories — “craziness” (or psychotic behaviour) and “nervousness” (bad nerves), which we would categorize as psychosomatic or neurotic conditions. For both types of conditions there is believed to be a range of causative factors which can be considered either supernatural or natural. Spiritism, witchcraft, and fate are believed to be the most important supernatural causes of mental illness, and become clearly apparent as the main factors when informants are asked about them in such a way that they are not obliged to speak directly about their own personal beliefs in supernatural determinants of illness. The authors discuss the significance of supernatural beliefs in mental illness causation in the context of patients’ appeal to community folk healers or to mental health clinics.


2017 ◽  
Vol 63 (4) ◽  
pp. 330-338
Author(s):  
AnMarie Kamanie Ramkissoon ◽  
Casswina Donald ◽  
Gerard Hutchinson

Background/Introduction: Perceptions about the aetiology of mental illness are likely to influence help-seeking behaviour. Understanding help-seeking behaviour will improve service provision and access. Therefore, this is likely to improve treatment outcomes. Methods: We assessed the perceptions and help-seeking behaviours surrounding mental illness in a Trinidadian population of 158 tertiary-level students (136 female, 22 male; mean age 30) by analysing their responses to a questionnaire which asked for responses regarding a case vignette of a 25-year-old young woman exhibiting symptoms suggestive of schizophrenia. Results: Of the respondents, 32.3% attributed the symptoms to supernatural causes. Specifically, 27.8% to someone doing her bad and 24.1% to evil spirits. In all, 77.2% of respondents indicated that mental illness was caused by medical problems and 63.3% to work stress. A minimum of 9.5% of the students therefore have dual perceptions regarding causation (77.2 + 32.3 = 109.5) Those who perceived causation to be supernatural said they would seek help from both medical ( p = .000) and supernatural ( p = .000) modalities. This also applied significantly to those who said the causation was medical, that is, seeking both religious intervention ( p = .000) and medical intervention (.000) as the first path in the health-seeking pathway. Conclusion: Dual help-seeking behaviour seems to be the functional result of an integration of religious and medical models of mental illness causation even in respondents who clearly identified only one of these as the likely cause of the illness behaviour.


2003 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 489-524
Author(s):  
Brent Pollitt

Mental illness is a serious problem in the United States. Based on “current epidemiological estimates, at least one in five people has a diagnosable mental disorder during the course of a year.” Fortunately, many of these disorders respond positively to psychotropic medications. While psychiatrists write some of the prescriptions for psychotropic medications, primary care physicians write more of them. State legislatures, seeking to expand patient access to pharmacological treatment, granted physician assistants and nurse practitioners prescriptive authority for psychotropic medications. Over the past decade other groups have gained some form of prescriptive authority. Currently, psychologists comprise the primary group seeking prescriptive authority for psychotropic medications.The American Society for the Advancement of Pharmacotherapy (“ASAP”), a division of the American Psychological Association (“APA”), spearheads the drive for psychologists to gain prescriptive authority. The American Psychological Association offers five main reasons why legislatures should grant psychologists this privilege: 1) psychologists’ education and clinical training better qualify them to diagnose and treat mental illness in comparison with primary care physicians; 2) the Department of Defense Psychopharmacology Demonstration Project (“PDP”) demonstrated non-physician psychologists can prescribe psychotropic medications safely; 3) the recommended post-doctoral training requirements adequately prepare psychologists to prescribe safely psychotropic medications; 4) this privilege will increase availability of mental healthcare services, especially in rural areas; and 5) this privilege will result in an overall reduction in medical expenses, because patients will visit only one healthcare provider instead of two–one for psychotherapy and one for medication.


1996 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 274-275
Author(s):  
O. Lawrence ◽  
J.D. Gostin

In the summer of 1979, a group of experts on law, medicine, and ethics assembled in Siracusa, Sicily, under the auspices of the International Commission of Jurists and the International Institute of Higher Studies in Criminal Science, to draft guidelines on the rights of persons with mental illness. Sitting across the table from me was a quiet, proud man of distinctive intelligence, William J. Curran, Frances Glessner Lee Professor of Legal Medicine at Harvard University. Professor Curran was one of the principal drafters of those guidelines. Many years later in 1991, after several subsequent re-drafts by United Nations (U.N.) Rapporteur Erica-Irene Daes, the text was adopted by the U.N. General Assembly as the Principles for the Protection of Persons with Mental Illness and for the Improvement of Mental Health Care. This was the kind of remarkable achievement in the field of law and medicine that Professor Curran repeated throughout his distinguished career.


2009 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 7-10
Author(s):  
Craig Uejo ◽  
Stephen Demeter

Abstract In the AMAGuides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), Sixth Edition, distal clavicle resection (resection arthroplasty of the acromioclavicular joint [ACJ]) results in ratable impairment, but only a single diagnosis within a region may be rated. Therefore, if another impairing condition is present in the shoulder region (eg, impingement syndrome or rotator cuff disease) only that resulting in the greatest causally related impairment is rated. In the setting of an occupational or other compensable injury or illness, causation of the impairment often is a key issue because, typically, only impairment that is causally related to the injury can be rated. For example, assume that a lifting injury at work caused a tear in a rotator cuff tendon that was already attenuated by repetitive impingement on inferiorly projecting spurs from longstanding degenerative arthritis of the ACJ. If surgery was performed for a traumatic rotator cuff tear and the distal clavicle also was resected due to preexisting ACJ arthritis, the latter surgery is not considered to be related to the injury. In other words, because the ACJ arthritis was neither caused nor worsened by the injury, this condition is not rated. The distal clavicular resection may have been warranted to diminish pain due to ACJ arthritis and/or eliminate the distal clavicle as a source of impingement.


2008 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 8-8
Author(s):  
Richard T. Katz

Abstract The author, who is the editor of the Mental and Behavioral Disorders chapter of the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), Sixth Edition, comments on the previous article, Assessing Mental and Behavioral Disorder Impairment: Overview of Sixth Edition Approaches in this issue of The Guides Newsletter. The new Mental and Behavioral Disorders (M&BD) chapter, like others in the AMA Guides, is a consensus opinion of many authors and thus reflects diverse points of view. Psychiatrists and psychologists continue to struggle with diagnostic taxonomies within the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, but anxiety, depression, and psychosis are three unequivocal areas of mental illness for which the sixth edition of the AMA Guides provides M&BD impairment rating. Two particular challenges faced the authors of the chapter: how could M&BD disorders be rated (and yet avoid an onslaught of attorney requests for an M&BD rating in conjunction with every physical impairment), and what should be the maximal impairment rating for a mental illness. The sixth edition uses three scales—the Psychiatric Impairment Rating Scale, the Global Assessment of Function, and the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale—after careful review of a wide variety of indices. The AMA Guides remains a work in progress, but the authors of the M&BD chapter have taken an important step toward providing a reasonable method for estimating impairment.


2007 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 4-8
Author(s):  
Frederick Fung

Abstract A diagnosis of toxic-related injury/illness requires a consideration of the illness related to the toxic exposure, including diagnosis, causation, and permanent impairment; these are best performed by a physician who is certified by a specialty board certified by the American Board of Preventive Medicine. The patient must have a history of symptoms consistent with the exposure and disease at issue. In order to diagnose the presence of a specific disease, the examiner must find subjective complaints that are consistent with the objective findings, and both the subjective complaints and objective findings must be consistent with the disease that is postulated. Exposure to a specific potentially causative agent at a defined concentration level must be documented and must be sufficient to induce a particular pathology in order to establish a diagnosis. Differential diagnoses must be entertained in order to rule out other potential causes, including psychological etiology. Furthermore, the identified exposure at the defined concentration level must be capable of causing the diagnosis being postulated before the examiner can conclude that there has been a cause-and-effect relationship between the exposure and the disease (dose-response relationship). The evaluator's opinion should make biological and epidemiological sense. The treatment plan and prognosis should be consistent with evidence-based medicine, and the rating of impairment must be based on objective findings in involved systems.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document