• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

New name for PTSD could mean less stigma

Journeyman

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
1,049
Points
940
Sorry, I guess I see this as focused on terminology hair-splitting rather than getting to the crux of treating troops. It's certainly not remotely anything I'm expert in, so I'll bow out.

 

mariomike

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
607
Points
1,260
medicineman said:
This isn't something that's limited to soldiers or emergency service workers, though there is a high predomminance due to recurrent exposures and cultures of not talking things out with folks.

In spite of the cumulative stress, I wonder how many would say ( at least privately ) that doing good work was the most fun ( outside of romance ) they remember in their lives?
 

Journeyman

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
1,049
Points
940
mariomike said:
In spite of the cumulative stress, I wonder how many would say ( at least privately ) that doing good work was the most fun ( outside of romance ) they remember in their lives?
Now how is this remotely relevant to the naming of Stress Injuries/Disorders?!  ::)



Edit: I can't believe I had to take you off <Ignore> to take MilPoints; not like it'll matter.
 

medicineman

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
585
Points
1,010
Journeyman said:
Sorry, I guess I see this as focused on terminology hair-splitting rather than getting to the crux of treating troops. It's certainly not remotely anything I'm expert in, so I'll bow out.

Really in the end it is about hair splitting and making something sound more palatable or as something soldiers can relate to.  No matter what you call it, I personally don't think it'll make soldiers with problems seek out help any more readily than they do now.  There has to be a cultural shift that makes it more acceptable to seek out help for problems (largely by those that have never been exposed to the situations themselves and so don't believe those problems exist) and a systemic one that forces leaders to lead and  "Know [their] toops and promote their welfare" instead of manage business plans.

MM
 

the 48th regulator

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
0
Points
410
medicineman said:
Really in the end it is about hair splitting and making something sound more palatable or as something soldiers can relate to.  No matter what you call it, I personally don't think it'll make soldiers with problems seek out help any more readily than they do now.  There has to be a cultural shift that makes it more acceptable to seek out help for problems (largely by those that have never been exposed to the situations themselves and so don't believe those problems exist) and a systemic one that forces leaders to lead and  "Know [their] toops and promote their welfare" instead of manage business plans.

MM

You do have to agree since the founding of the Program OSISS, and the concept of OSIs in 2001, many more people have come forward to get  the treatment needed.

We have changed the attitude within the CF, that it is okay to deal with that kind of injury.  Do we need more work, most definitely, but people are more comfortable talking about the issue.

 

medicineman

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
585
Points
1,010
the 48th regulator said:
You do have to agree since the founding of the Program OSISS, and the concept of OSIs in 2001, many more people have come forward to get  the treatment needed.

We have changed the attitude within the CF, that it is okay to deal with that kind of injury.  Do we need more work, most definitely, but people are more comfortable talking about the issue.

Tess - I do agree that things are better than before, don't get me wrong, especially the Peer Counselling program.  There are still issues out there with folks that seem to think if you can't see it, it doesn't exist.  Good leadership helps - things are noticed, pointed out and the person is pointed in the right direction or taken outright to get the help they need, and are then supported throughout the process.  Poor leaders take it upon themselves to either demean or ignore the problems and allow them to fester until it's too late...and then continue to give as little support as possible afterwards.  There is that problem of people not trusting their leadership to do the right thing. 

MM
 

the 48th regulator

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
0
Points
410
medicineman said:
Tess - I do agree that things are better than before, don't get me wrong, especially the Peer Counselling program.  There are still issues out there with folks that seem to think if you can't see it, it doesn't exist.  Good leadership helps - things are noticed, pointed out and the person is pointed in the right direction or taken outright to get the help they need, and are then supported throughout the process.  Poor leaders take it upon themselves to either demean or ignore the problems and allow them to fester until it's too late...and then continue to give as little support as possible afterwards.  There is that problem of people not trusting their leadership to do the right thing. 

MM


Roger that, very well said.  The key point you bring up, which is so true, is Good keen leadership. 

dileas

tess
 

Armymedic

Army.ca Veteran
Mentor
Reaction score
0
Points
0
This first mistake is to think that a name change would simply make the problem easier to change. "Dead", even if referred to as bought the farm, kicked the bucket, or passed on, is still "dead". The only thing changing nomenclature will give you is a extra points from the 'good idea fairy'.

Second error is to think that PTSD is entirely a product of military service, specifically combat. Hate to have to reenforce reality, but it is a condition that can be acquired by anyone who "has experienced, witnessed, or been confronted with an event or events that involve actual or threatened death or serious injury, or a threat to the physical integrity of oneself or others". In three weeks of working along side a civilian psychiatrist, I saw more cases of true PTSD from purely civilian circumstances than I have seen in my all military patient population in 2 years.

Th one point discussed that I do agree with is that out society, in the CF and Canada, as a whole has to learn that mental illness is as common as 1 in 10 adults, and accept it as an illness like Parkinson's, or MS where the person may function normally, but will never ever be truly healed.
 

dogger1936

Sr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
They can call it anything they want. Fact is I can say I never had one issue from regular force CoC. Infact I had excellent support from my CO and RSM down.

I've heard other troops outside of the combat arms talking about it in a negative way; but none from those who did the deed's we do.
 

cupper

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Unfortunately recognition of PTSD or OSI or other mental health issues has only been recent (last 10 years or so). My father suffered for many years with PTSD before being diagnosed. He survived the Kootenay explosion in '69. But it wasn't until the survivors got together in '99 to recognize the 30th anniversary that they started opening up, and seek help.

Back then, you self medicated with alcohol, and moved on with your life. If you showed any signs of a problem, it was either dealt with as a disciplinary problem, substance abuse treatment,  C & P, or release. But you didn't talk about it.
 

Gronk

Jr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
My Opinion-  PTS Is an injury and should be named and treated as such.
 

Gronk

Jr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I agree w/ Rider in that we as service members/vets tend to think of PTSD wrongly as military exclusive injury. While I was still in, I spent about a month in a psych ward, and there were many people in there w/ PTSD. Aside from a gentleman who was a child soldier in Africa, I was the only soldier in there. It was an eye opener for me.
 

Greymatters

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Following on to that statement, the fact  that PTSD is not limited to serving members and vets is also part of the problem - PTSD is now a common buzz word in the claims industry, with most every defence lawyer adding the term 'PTSD' to the previously commonplace terms of 'STI' (soft tissue injury) and 'loss of enjoyment of life' in their claims for compensation. 
 

dogger1936

Sr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
"I don't like words that hide the truth. I don't like words that conceal reality. I don't like euphemisms, or euphemistic language.

And American English is loaded with euphemisms. Cause Americans have a lot of trouble dealing with reality. Americans have trouble facing the truth, so they invent the kind of a soft language to protect themselves from it, and it gets worse with every generation.

For some reason, it just keeps getting worse. I'll give you an example of that. There's a condition in combat. Most people know about it. It's when a fighting person's nervous system has been stressed to it's absolute peak and maximum. Can't take anymore input. The nervous system has either (click) snapped or is about to snap.

In the first world war, that condition was called Shell Shock. Simple, honest, direct language. Two syllables, Shell Shock. Almost sounds like the guns themselves. That was seventy years ago.

Then a whole generation went by and the second world war came along and very same combat condition was called Battle Fatigue. Four syllables now. Takes a little longer to say. Doesn't seem to hurt as much. Fatigue is a nicer word than shock. Shell Shock! Battle Fatigue.

Then we had the war in Korea, 1950. Madison avenue was riding high by that time, and the very same combat condition was called Operational Exhaustion. Hey, were up to eight syllables now! And the humanity has been squeezed completely out of the phrase. It's totally sterile now. Operational exhaustion. Sounds like something that might happen to your car.

Then of course, came the war in Viet Nam, which has only been over for about sixteen or seventeen years, and thanks to the lies and deceits surrounding that war, I guess it's no surprise that the very same condition was called Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. Still eight syllables, but we've added a hyphen! And the pain is completely buried under jargon. Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder.

I'll bet you if we'd of still been calling it Shell Shock, some of those Viet Nam veterans might have gotten the attention they needed at the time. I'll betcha. I'll betcha."

George Carlin
 

The Bread Guy

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
2,165
Points
1,260
.... [urlhttp://to.pbs.org/M261a1]via NPR[/url]:
A key leader in the psychiatric community has rejected the idea of altering the name of a traumatic condition affecting an estimated tens of thousands of U.S. combat veterans -- a move that effectively blocks growing efforts by a small group of psychiatrists and military brass concerned about reducing patient stigma.

Dr. Matthew Friedman, who is chairing the committee that is updating the trauma section of the dictionary of mental illness, said changing the name of the condition could have "unintended negative consequences" because "it would confuse the issue and set up diagnostic distinctions for which there is no scientific evidence." The dictionary, known as the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, is considered the bible by the psychiatric association.

Last year, then-Army Vice Chief of Staff Peter Chiarelli asked the American Psychiatric Association to modify the name of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. The four star general says calling the condition a "disorder" perpetuates a bias against the mental health illness and is a barrier to veterans getting the care they need.

More recently, two leading trauma psychiatrists similarly asked the Association, which is updating its dictionary of mental health illness, to change the word "disorder" to "injury," calling the condition PTSI instead.

But at Monday's psychiatric association annual conference, Friedman said the net effect of such a modification would be to tinker with a psychiatric diagnosis rather than help patients. "To change to PTSI without anything else would accomplish nothing positive," Friedman said.

But Chiarelli, who is now retired and spoke on the same panel as Friedman at the conference, assailed the leading psychiatric professional organization's refusal to make a one-word change in nomenclature. "I believe language means something -- and it means something if your desire is to help and to treat everyone," he said. "To allow a word like disorder -- which may be no barrier to you whatsoever -- to get in the way of the help they need, I find this just absolutely unconscionable." ....
 
Top