![\"only-us-logo\"](\"https:\/\/i1.wp.com\/blogs.sussex.ac.uk\/psychology\/files\/2016\/10\/only-us-logo.jpg\"){kind=logo}
<\/a><\/p>\nI invite you to enter the phrase \u2018university and abnormal psychology\u2019 into a search engine; now scroll through the pages that it returns. You will see just how many institutions offer modules, courses, and degrees labelled \u2018abnormal psychology\u2019. Some of the world\u2019s most prestigious universities are on that list. But what even is \u2018abnormal psychology\u2019? If you take a deeper look at the course content, you will find that they purport to teach their students about mental health (also more sympathetically known as clinical psychology). How can these courses teach their students about the latest research, when the course title is stigmatising and fundamentally wrong?<\/p>\n
The dictionary defines abnormal as: \u201cdeviating from what is normal or usual, typically in a way that is undesirable or worrying\u201d. The suggested synonyms are rare, freak, deviant, weird, unexpected\u2026 as well as a host of other offensive terms. Ignoring the issue of stigma for a moment (although I believe this is the most important issue), I hope to prove to you that the use of this term to describe mental health is inaccurate.<\/p>\n
Abnormal could be taken to mean that mental health problems are rare or unusual. This is false. The Time to Change campaign in the UK reports that 1 in 4 people will experience mental health issues. I would argue this figure is actually far too small. The \u20181 in 4\u2019 figure is based on the results of the 2009 UK National Household survey; but only those with a recognised disorder were included in this analysis. Many people experience mental health difficulties without a clinical diagnosis (Baumeister & Morar, 2008) \u2013 so it is highly likely that there will be a lot of people experiencing mental health problems that were not counted. Also the effects of the recent economic crisis on mental health (Karanikolos et al., 2013) is likely to inflate this figure even more. Consequently it is probable that more than 25% of the UK population will experience mental health difficulties. So, are mental health problems rare? I don\u2019t think so.<\/p>\n
Another understanding of abnormal could be that those with mental health problems are somehow different from the rest of the \u2018normal\u2019 population. The flaw with this assumption relies on the understanding that mental health issues can be reduced to a dichotomous entity \u2013 you are either \u2018abnormal\u2019 or \u2018normal\u2019, you are either a \u2018freak\u2019 or \u2018ordinary\u2019. This does not reflect reality. For example, taking the dichotomous approach, we could describe someone as being either happy or unhappy. But in practice people can be just a little bit happy, or their happiness could fluctuate over the day. In line with this thinking, the most recent understandings of mental health argue that mental health can be best understood as part of a spectrum or continuum (e.g. Cuijpers, de Graaf, & van Dorsselaer, 2004; Tylka & Subich, 1999; van Os, Linscott, Myin-Germeys, Delespaul, & Krabbendam, 2009). Everyone has a place on the continuum, with the potential to move either up or down the scale. If we all have the capacity to be at both the most and least extreme points on the continuum, then how can mental health be viewed as \u2018them and us\u2019? Either we are all freaks or none of us are.<\/p>\n
A final possible implication from the term \u2018abnormal\u2019 is that the development of mental health problems is an anomaly. In fact, there is strong evidence to suggest that mental health problems can be interpreted as a reaction to stressful or traumatic life events. This is supported by an overwhelming pool of evidence demonstrating the link between stressful life events and the development of mental health difficulties (e.g. Carr, Martins, Stingel, Lemgruber, & Juruena, 2013; Kraan, Velthorst, Smit, de Haan, & van der Gaag, 2015; Lindert et al., 2014; Nielsen, Tangen, Idsoe, Matthiesen, & Mager\u00f8y, 2015). Evolution has taught us the value of reacting to extreme stress on a cognitive, emotional and physical level so that we can learn about ourselves, and the world (Baldwin, 2013). As many people will experience a trauma at some point their life (Lukaschek et al., 2013), it is then plausible that the event will trigger mental health difficulties for some people. What is so surprising about that? The most pertinent problem with the term \u2018abnormal psychology\u2019 is its inherent stigma. Mental health stigma can stop people from seeking help or support (Corrigan, 2004), cause feelings of shame (Corrigan & Miller, 2004), worsen mental health symptoms, and reduce treatment adherence (Livingston & Boyd, 2010). I believe using the term \u2018abnormal psychology\u2019 within universities is discriminatory. Its continued use will teach students that prejudice is acceptable, and increase self-stigma amongst those students experiencing mental health problems.<\/p>\n I am aware that I have been predominantly negative thus far \u2013 I hope I can reassure you that change is possible. At the University of Sussex (where I study), as recent as last year the Psychology department offered an elective called \u2018Abnormal Psychology\u2019. However, lecturers and students challenged this, and the course title has now been changed to something that is more accurate and less stigmatising (the course is now called \u2018Clinical Psychology and Mental Health\u2019).<\/p>\n The aim of this blog is somewhat a \u2018call to arms\u2019. If you are part of a university that still uses the term \u2018abnormal psychology\u2019, why not challenge it? You may be able to see through the fallacy of this terminology, but I can assure you there will be others who won\u2019t. The continued use of the term \u2018abnormal psychology\u2019 will only reinforce the lie that people experiencing mental health difficulties are to be feared. This is not an issue of political correctness; it is an issue of social responsibility.<\/p>\n If you are able to bring about change in your university I would love to hear about it. Please feel free to tweet me @MissCHazell. For more information, the British Psychological Society has a great resource on language in relation to mental health: http:\/\/www.bps.org.uk\/system\/files\/Public%20files\/guidelines_on_language_web.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n Also I am a big supporter of the Only Us campaign. They embody everything I have tried to say here \u2013 they believe \u201cthere is no them and us; there is only us\u201d. Check them out on twitter: @OnlyUsCampaign<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Cassie Hazell is currently in the final year of her PhD with the University of Sussex, supervised by Dr Clara Strauss, Dr Mark Hayward, and Dr Kate Cavanagh. Her PhD looks at the effects of a guided self-help cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) for people who hear distressing voices (also known as verbal auditory hallucinations).<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n<\/a><\/p>\n