Schizophrenia May Be Eliminated

 Expurgation (4)

   The title may be misleading. It is the word 'schizophrenia' that is likely to disappear, not the mental disorder. The sub-title may be puzzling since it refers to three other posts I have provided, none of which you will have read. They all have to do with arguments about the purging of words from our dictionaries, just as we are now also arguing about the elimination of names from our maps. The first is about the word 'Accident', which tort lawyers, in particular, want removed (I just looked back at that one and it isn't bad.) The second is, "Illegal Aliens,"since there are none to be found on this planet. The third is  "Mistress",  because there is not a corresponding term to define the person your wife may be fooling around with. This fourth one may be my last, because keeping up with these linguistic battles is a full time job.

    Schizophrenia has surfaced since there seems to be a stigma associated with the illness. I pointed out recently that the American Medical Association wants practitioners to avoid troublesome words like, 'vulnerable' and 'high-risk'. Now the members of the American Psychiatric Association may opt not to label someone as suffering from 'schizophrenia', and the diagnosis may be dropped from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Those involved in the construction of the DSM are well practiced at this type of endeavour and in some cases have gone so far as to even eliminate the 'disease' - 'homosexuality' - for example. Those in the profession seem to be split about how to describe those with a 'split personality'.

  Clearly, yet again, I have tackled a subject about which I am not sufficiently credentialed. So, I will point you to the sources and let you decide this linguistic matter for yourself. The place for laypeople to begin is here: ‘Schizophrenia’ Still Carries a Stigma. Will Changing the Name Help?" Karen Brown, New York Times, Dec. 20, 2021.

"Many people with or connected to the mental illness approve of updating the name, a new survey shows. But some experts are not convinced it’s the answer....The idea is that replacing the term “schizophrenia” with something less frightening and more descriptive will not only change how the public perceives people with the diagnosis, but also how these people see themselves."

Good arguments for both sides are presented, including some mundane ones, like if the patient, loses the label, they could lose their insurance coverage. And, as Dr. Carpenter argues, "A rose by any other name would smell the same...“And if you make the change, how long until the stigma catches up with it?”

   Those serious about schizophrenia should have a look at the survey which is found here and the abstract is provided. 

"Are We Ready for a Name Change for Schizophrenia? A Survey of Multiple Stakeholders,"

(many authors), Schizophrenia Research, Volume 238, December 2021, Pages 152-160.

Abstract

"About one in 100 people worldwide are diagnosed with schizophrenia. Many people advocate for a name change for the condition, pointing to the stigma and discrimination associated with the term “schizophrenia”, as well as to how the name poorly characterizes features of the illness. The purpose of this project was to collect opinions from a broad, diverse sample of stakeholders about possible name changes for schizophrenia. The project represented a partnership between researchers, clinicians, and those with lived experience with psychosis. The group developed a survey to assess opinions about the need for change in the name schizophrenia as well as potential alternate names. We accumulated 1190 responses from a broad array of community stakeholders, including those with lived experience of mental illness, family members, clinicians, researchers, government officials, and the general public. Findings indicated that the majority of respondents (74.1%) favored a name change for schizophrenia. Most (71.4%) found the name stigmatizing. Of the proposed alternate names, those with the most support included “Altered Perception Syndrome”, “Psychosis Spectrum Syndrome”, and “Neuro-Emotional Integration Disorder”. Survey findings provide strong support for renaming schizophrenia. Most expressed hope that a name change will reduce stigma and discrimination."

   This issue was raised a few years ago, in this article which also includes many examples of how 'schizophrenia' is defined in other languages: "Name Change for Schizophrenia," (many authors), Schizophrenia Bulletin, Volume 40, Issue 2, March 2014, Pages 255–258.

I suppose the first order of business will be to change the name of the two journals in which these studies appear.

Those interested in the illness rather than the word should see:

"A Brief History of Schizophrenia: Schizophrenia through the Ages, Neel Burton, Psychology Today, May 4, 2020 and "10 Facts You Should Know About Schizophrenia," Michele Debczak, Mental Floss, Aug. 29, 2019.

The Bonus:

   If you are interested in words and those who used to be called 'crazy' or 'mad', have a look at: The Professor and the Madman by Simon Winchester (it was published in England as, The Surgeon of Crowthorne.) For a shorter version see: Chapter 7, "The Hermit and the Murderer" in his book: The Meaning of Everything: The Story of the Oxford English Dictionary. If you don't enjoy this recommendation, I will give back all of your money.

Expurgations (3) Mistress

For reasons that are unclear to me, I have been offering you linguistic warnings so that you will not embarrass yourself. Perhaps I am doing so simply because our language seems to be changing more rapidly and the penalties for violations in usage are increasingly severe. In any case, avoid the word ‘mistress’.

The subject is broached by the very accomplished Paula Broadwell, West Point graduate, Harvard graduate, etc., etc. who you know only as the mistress of General Petraeus, who is generally described only by reference to his professional and military achievements since there is no corresponding male word for ‘mistress’.

The problem was addressed by the public editor of The New York Times in this article: “Is ‘Mistress’ a Word That Has Seen Its Best Days?”, Margaret Sullivan, March 26, 2015. After receiving many comments and complaints she thinks the word should go. Here is a portion of the article:

“I propose just such a shove to hasten the departure of “mistress” from news stories describing a modern-day woman having an extramarital affair.
I asked the standards editor, Philip B. Corbett, about the use of the term in Times stories. He responded:

‘I agree that “mistress” has a somewhat old-fashioned tone to it that isn’t ideal (though I don’t accept the argument that it necessarily implies a financial arrangement; it doesn’t. First definition from American Heritage: “A woman who has a continuing sexual relationship with a man who is married to someone else.”)

One problem is that there isn’t really a perfect word here. “Lover” is probably a little better, and we’ve used it fairly often in the Petraeus-Broadwell situation. But “lover” doesn’t necessarily convey the idea that one or both partners is married to someone else. And it, too, has a bit of a romance-novel tone that isn’t perfect in a news story.’
A longer description is probably best, but not always easy or practical in a headline or a lead paragraph: “the woman with whom Mr. Petraeus, who was married, carried on a secret sexual relationship …”?

In a more recent article about the issue  in the Times the author concludes:
“As a student of language, I was sympathetic to her [Broadwell’s] cause. As I am a feminist, the double standard apparent in the way she was characterized was clear: He was the revered general who made a grave mistake; she was a psycho homewrecker who, as many often reminded her, had “brought the general down.” “Why Do People Still Use the Word ‘Mistress’? A Reporter Reflects, Jessica Bennett, June 7, 2016

I was able to find an earlier article about another ‘affair’ which also raised the issue of the word ‘mistress’ and here it is:

“A “Mistress” by Any Other Name: Can't We Find a Better Word to Refer to Maria Belen Chapur?” Mary Elizabeth Williams, Salon, July 1, 2009.

“As we sift through the wreckage of the Mark Sanford [remember him? - the former Governor of South Carolina who supposedly was out hiking] media circus, one thing that’s become clear is that the English language is sadly lacking for nomenclature. Specifically — shouldn’t we have a better word for a professional woman who’s had a husband and a family and career of her own than “mistress”?

The word, after all, carries old fashioned associations with a “kept woman,” and it certainly has no satisfying male counterpart. If Maria Belen Chapur was a mistress to Sanford, what, after all, was he to her?”

The Associated Press now deal with the issue in the latest AP Stylebook: “The AP now suggest avoiding the word mistress because there is no male equivalent. Instead they recommend using friend, companion, or lover. The new entry reads: “Whenever possible, phrasing that acknowledges both people in the relationship is preferred: ‘The two were romantically (or sexually) involved.” “The Signified and the Signifier: AP Stylebook Rejects Your Misogyny, Says No More Mistress,” Eve Peyser, New York Magazine, April 4, 2016.

As you might imagine, readers of some of these articles came up with suggestions for a good male term. For example, General Petraeus could have been referred to as Broadwell’s “Main Squeeze”,  or “misteress” or “cicisbeo” could be used.

I gave this topic some thought since it is highly likely that “mistresses” will be discussed more often than, say NAFTA, as the U.S. presidential campaign enters even more ruthless territory. But, I realized that the issue is far too complicated for me - as most of these topics are, once I start trying to think about them. For example, if one does come up with a new word to describe the randy husband, will it be usable when the couple come from the same sex and one of them fools around with an option from one of the growing number of other genders? And what about related concepts? If someone is fortunate enough to turn Trump into a “cuckold”, how do we refer to his wife - as the “cuckquean”? You see what I mean.

Before I abandoned this project I did have a look at the OED. It is interesting that the first few definitions of “mistress” are positive as in - “A woman who has charge of a child or young person; a governess”. It is only when you get to number seven that you find - “Mistress -  A woman other than his wife with whom a man has a long-lasting sexual relationship. In early use: †a woman notorious for some act.”

I did, however, learn one thing when I looked at some of the early uses of the word and that is that Men have always been, and will likely continue to be, Cads. See below:

1675   W. Wycherley Country-Wife i. i. 5   And next, to the pleasure of making a New Mistriss, is that of being rid of an old One.