You Are Not Your Diagnosis

In a previous , I discussed the importance of names and of naming experiences. Today I’ve been pondering how language shapes our personality, our experience and also our culture.  

Prior to becoming a Professional Counselor, I was a language instructor. While studying Applied Linguistics, I read about a hypothesis that profoundly impacted my understanding of the relationship between language and culture. According to the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, language impacts its speakers’ ability to conceptualize and categorize their world. In other words, the content and structure of language contributes to the psychological framework of its speakers. These speakers constitute a culture, so one could argue that the language of a people impacts the shared cultural outlook. One example of this could be the fact that the Inuit language allows for a variety of words for “snow” due to the fact that their perspective is focused on the variations in the snow itself, and what each variation means to their activities and livelihood; therefore, unique words are used to represent all of the mental categories that exist for snow. Another example came to me while I was living in Italy. In U.S. American English, we often say “kill two birds with one stone” as an indication of being efficient by doing two things at once. Not only does this idiom indicate the importance of “saving” time, it also alludes to a certain comfort with violence. The Italian version, literally translated into U.S. American English, is “get two birds with one fava bean.” I used to joke that Americans wanted to kill the birds, while Italians wanted to feed them.

Obviously, these examples cannot fully represent the complex relationship between language and cultural personality, if you will. However, if we agree to make a little bit of room for the possibility that the language we use impacts our understanding of our world, and of ourselves in it, I’d like to shift our perspective to how we use language around mental health diagnoses.

Take a look at the subtle difference(s) in these sentences:

• I’m ADD.
• I have ADD.
• She’s schizophrenic.
• She has schizophrenia.
• Their son is autistic.
• Their son has autism.

Do you notice a slight shift in the tone and significance of changing the “I am a diagnosis” to “I have a diagnosis?” Realizing this shift in perspective is one of my personal goals while talking to others, both inside and outside of my office. It is my belief that the transitive nature (in a mathematical rather than grammatical sense) of the verb “to be” implies “I am my diagnosis and it is me. We are the same.” While having a diagnosis can initially bring relief, claiming it and using it to define one’s self can be restrictive and self-defeating. When I have a virus, I say “I have the flu” rather than “I am the flu”—It is something that is separate from me, even though it’s currently inhabiting my body and making me miserable. In knowing that the flu is separate from me, I know that it will one day not be dominating my life—I’m able to ask for help from loved ones to get my needs met; I’ll develop the skill of figuring out exactly where the remote control needs to be so that I can reach it without moving too much; and I know that one day it won’t feel so oppressive, so that allows me to have one of the most essential components of a sustaining life: hope.

It is my belief that mental illness needs to be conceptualized as something different from the person who is diagnosed with it. This conceptualization allows the person to examine the disorder as something “outside” of himself or herself—it allows a certain degree of perspective that permits the person to retain or create an individual identity that is not defined by the diagnosis. If this declaration of identity distinct from diagnosis does not occur, then the risk is run of the person never fully engaging in recovery—in other words, if I am my depression, and that’s what defines me, why would I want to feel better, because then what would define me?

The language we use says a lot about us as individuals and as a culture. I encourage each of us to use language that contributes to us feeling empowered: according to the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, if we can select vocabulary and grammar that connotes empowerment, then we can conceptualize ourselves as having power.  In my next post, I’ll take a look at other aspects of language that can affect our unconscious in subtle yet profound ways.   

__________________________________________________________

Brandy Smith is a Licensed Professional Counselor at Avanti Counseling Services, Inc. in the Oakhurst District of Decatur. For additional information about this post or about services available, please visit www.AvantiCounselingServices.com.