Table of Contents: Introduction What is Serious Mental Illness? Is there a Link between Serious Mental Illness and Violence? Psychosocial ...

I’ve gotten so fed up arguing about mental illness and violence, I wrote a blog post setting the record straight.

I have ads turned off and I am not benefitting in any way from my blog. Just want to compile and share information.

TL;DR: Only 3-5% of violent acts can be attributed to those with SMI [20], co-occurring substance use plays the most pivotal role [24], many psychosocial contextual factors influence violent acts [11], and while individuals with SMI are potentially 2.1% more likely than those without a mental illness to be violent [4], they are 10 times more likely to be victims of violence themselves. [20]

There does not exist a strong association between severe mental illness and violent behavior in general. …the notion that mentally ill individuals are violent is a harmful myth that only serves to further stigmatize an already disadvantaged population.

This behavior is detrimental to the 26% of our (U.S.) population suffering from a diagnosed mental illness. [10] The false claims that individuals with SMI are dangerous and responsible for mass shootings and acts of extremism need to be called out for the harmful lies that they are.

  • FireTower@lemmy.worldEnglish
    2·
    1 year ago

    First as someone scrolling through All this is probably one of the highest quality Lemmy posts I’ve seen. With actual cited source.

    But I think there is a common use vs field use disconnect here. When they are attributing mass violence to those with serious mental illnesses they may not be intending on using a term with a specific meaning in the field of mental health.

    But instead doing things like including ASPD in with SMIs because they simply view ASPD as a mental illness, and in those cases where it resulted in tragedy it was severe. Because to them anyone in a particularly tumultuous mental space that endangers others has a severe mental illness in a layman’s sense of the words.

    It would definitely be better if everyone was able to use more thinly defined terms. Overly broad terms aren’t very conducive to resolving matters.

    • GONADS125@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      3·
      1 year ago

      First, thank you for the compliment!

      I think there is a common use vs field use disconnect here.

      I completely agree and educating about that difference is my goal. It’s not hard to imagine why people make that categorical error, but it is harmful to one of the most disadvantaged populations there are.

      I wrote that with the intention of sharing it when I see misinformation and stigmatization. I found myself getting into the same arguments on reddit for years (as well as here), so rather than articulate an argument every time, I decided I’d have a loaded gun ready haha.