Definitions of abnormality part 2

Failure to function adequately

- A person may cross the line between 'normal' and 'abnormal' at the point when they can no longer cope with the demands of everyday life. We might decide that someone is going through this when they are unable to maintain basic standards of nutrition and/or hygiene. Could also consider the same if someone is not able to hold down a job or maintain relationships

When is someone failing to function adequately?

- Rosenhan and Seligman (1989) proposed signs used to determine this:
When a person no longer conforms to standard interpersonal rules, e.g. maintaining eye contact and respecting personal space
When a person experiences severe personal distress
When a person's behaviour becomes irrational or dangerous to themselves and/or others

Deviation from ideal mental health

- Ignoring the issue of what makes someone abnormal but instead thinking about what makes anyone 'normal'. Once we have a picture of how we should be psychologically healthy then we can begin to identify who deviates from this

What does ideal mental health look like?

- Jahoda (1958) suggested we are in good mental health if we meet these:
No symptoms or distress
Rational and can perceive ourselves accurately
Self-actualise
Cope with stress
Realistic view of the world
Good self-esteem and lack guilt
Independent of other people
Successfully work, love, and enjoy leisure

Evaluation of failure to function adequately: Strengths

- Represents a sensible threshold for when people need professional help. Most of us have symptoms of mental disorder to some degree at some time, i.e. around 25% of people in the UK will experience a mental health problem in any given year. However, many people press on in the face of symptoms. It tends to be at the point that we cease to function adequately that people seek professional help or are noticed and referred for help by others

- This criterion means that treatment and services can be targeted to those who need them most

Evaluation of failure to function adequately: Weaknesses

- It is easy to label non-standard lifestyle choices as abnormal. In practice it can be hard to say when someone is truly failing to function and when they have simply chosen to deviate from social norms, e.g. not having a job or permanent address might seem like failing to function, and for some people it would be. However, people with alternative lifestyles choose to live 'off-grid'. Similarly to those who favour high-risk leisure activities or spiritual practises could be classed as irrational and perhaps a danger to self

- This means that people who make unusual choices are at risk of being labelled abnormal and their freedom of choice restricted

Evaluation of failure to function adequately: Weaknesses

- There are some circumstances in which most of us fail to cope for a time, e.g. bereavement. It may be unfair to give someone a label that may cause them future problems just because they react to difficult circumstances. On the other hand failure to function is no less real just because the cause is clear. Also, some people need professional help to adjust to circumstances like bereavement

Evaluation of deviation from ideal mental health: Strengths

- Highly comprehensive criterion. Jahoda's criterion covers most of the reasons why we might seek (or be referred for) help with mental health. This means that an individual's mental health can be discussed meaningfully with a range of professionals who might take different theoretical views, e.g. a medically trained psychiatrist may focus on symptoms whereas a humanistic counsellor may focus on self-actualisation

- This means that ideal mental health provides a checklist against which we can assess ourselves and others and discuss psychological issues with a range of professionals

Evaluation of deviation from ideal mental health: Weaknesses

- The different elements of the criterion are not equally applicable across a range of cultures. Some of Jahoda's criteria are firmly located in the context of the US and Europe generally, i.e. concept of self-actualisation would be dismissed as self-indulgent in much of the world. Even within Europe there is a variation in the value placed on personal independence, e.g. high in Germany, low in Italy. Furthermore what defines success in our working, social, and love-lives is different in different cultures

- This means it is difficult to apply the concept of ideal mental health from one culture to another

Evaluation of deviation from ideal mental health: Weaknesses

- Very few of us attain all of Jahoda's criteria, and probably none of us achieve all of them at the same time or keep them up for very long. It can be disheartening to see an impossible set of standards to live up to. On the other hand having such a comprehensive set of criteria for mental health to work towards might be of practical value to people wanting to improve their mental health