Schizophrenia Recovery and Quality of Work

The atypical antipsychotics have caused a revolution in the philosophies driving support and rehabilitation at the best addiction treatment center in Lahore. However, I haven't been following this development in the journals. I listen to presentations on treatment, particularly early intervention, which are pretty different. Recovery is a very appealing philosophy at the moment in mental health. As I understand it, there are at least two Recovery models. The radical model ignores biology and focuses on the sociology of the severe emotional distress that causes isolation from the community. This school is an offshoot of a long-standing antipsychiatry survivor movement that concentrates on labeling people with Women and Mental Illness Research illness. The theory is that the actual disease or severe emotional distress isn't as disabling as labeling the individual mentally ill. The labeling results in exclusion from the community, and the individual never recovers. Hospitalization in this model is a type of involuntary imprisonment, and the medication itself is only of temporary benefit.

The root issue is the exclusion from the community. Even this radical model has a certain heuristic appeal. That is, it's not accurate, but it is still instrumental in explaining reality. People are not biologists and don't see the world like a psychiatrist. They do understand exclusion from the community, and they do experience the stigmatization of labeling. This model also explains why illnesses like schizophrenia are less disabling in less developed countries, where there is generally less exclusion from the community. What it fails to recognize is how competitive modern society is fundamental. When I was homeless, no one ever gave me money or food. I couldn't beg, but begging is not a viable means of paying the rent in North America. Every winter, homeless people freeze to death in Canadian cities. Every day women are not safe walking on the streets after dark. In North America, women have to be competent to avoid being raped. We don't discuss it much, but every woman knows better than to walk in the park after dark. I was watching a Lonely Planet travel show about Japan and was surprised to learn that it's not true in Japan for some reason. The streets are entirely safe in Japan, and if you forget your purse at a restaurant, you can come back several hours later, and it would still be there. That is generally not true in North America, though. People take advantage of you in a competitive society. They are driven by their competitive struggle to pay the mortgage and raise their family.

This radical model of recovery focuses on what they feel people struggling with mental illness need most, hope. People who have been excluded from the community by their lack of competitive competence are facing a very steep climb back, and without hope for their future, they lose their motivation. This recovery model focuses on the support an individual needs to recover societal roles and never looks very far at underlying biology. They claim several long term studies support their recovery theory, but I noticed a flaw in that argument. There is a high recovery rate from schizophrenia mental illness symptoms in historical long term studies. Still, thirty or forty years ago, a diagnosis of schizophrenia was much less accurate and more of a catchall for anything that couldn't be easily diagnosed. All said and done, though, I like the humanistic angle this radical recovery school takes. I think of myself as a biologist because that is what I trained in at university, and I know how hard it is for a human to be a biologist. The term Grateful Dead comes to mind. A lot of principles of recovery people like Dr. Daniel Fisher write about are very appealing. His attitude is one of, Forget the biology; the patient needs to be in the driver's seat, and how can we facilitate that? There's a lot of common sense in that.

Another emerging recovery school is more traditional, gathering momentum through enlightened service providers. It redefines recovery to accommodate a disability. The biology or disability we're talking about is the disease of schizophrenia, and it's not written in stone. At the moment, schizophrenia is a uniquely individual experience, but many endure permanent partial disability, compromised competence, and vulnerability to psychotic relapses. These biological processes may be prevented or reversed in the future, but now, individuals have to live with compromised biology that leads to their isolation in society. My friends often comment that even though my accomplishments pale compared to ordinary peoples' achievements, they are especially significant because I have schizophrenia. My actions are a lot harder for me than they would be for an average person.

Recovery becomes a way the client can regain control of their life. The client knows when they have recovered. It's seen as the client speaking out about how they want services to operate, and consequently, it's seen as the model for delivering services. Recovery is a logical extension of empowerment actively encouraged in the 90s. To me, it's a feeling of managing my own life, being a part of the human race, and feeling proud of my individuality. For many years I was very ashamed of how unsuccessful I was. I was kicked out of graduate school, homeless for six months, and wasted twenty years of my life in a highly unpleasant, untreated psychosis. I realized I would be on antipsychotics and antidepressants for the rest of my life. I could live with that. To be a failure for the rest of my life was very depressing. I wanted to enjoy life like anybody else.