Stigmatization Series: Defining Mental Illness in The Courtroom, From Parents to Judges

This is the first blog post in my new Stigmatization Series. Throughout this series, I will draw on Sociology, Psychology and Legal expertise and theories. In the upcoming weeks, I shall explore for your reading pleasure:

• The motives for stigmatization
• How it is used for social control in various institutions and organizations
• The effects culture plays in stigmatizing a person or a group
• Provide the formula on how to destigmatize a person or a group using both Sociology and Psychology

The central theme around stigmatization appears to focus on, and involve, mental illnesses, but stigmatization extends far beyond the aspect of healthcare. In future blogs, I will explore other areas that weaponize stigmas. In this post, I'll focus on the aspect of defining mental dis-orders and what it means when there is an attempt to stigmatize a parent in the Saskatchewan legal arena. As such, mental illness affects everyone, including those in power positions, such as the judicial.

What Exactly Is Considered A Mental Illness?

From the National Library for Medicine, we are told what exactly is considered a mental illness, otherwise known as a mental dis-order. Yes, a diss... order... in the court, family courtly proceedings... MedlinePlus: Trusted Health Information for You describes it as "Mental [dis-orders or mental ill-nessies, lockness monsters🐉 in the key channel] are conditions that affect your thinking, feeling, mood, and behavior... They can affect your ability to relate to others and function each day." I, of course, added the "[red alert]" information, as is scholarly and sophisticated to do. However, read that last line of the quote in its entirety again, "They can affect your ability to relate to others and function each day" (italics and bolding mine). Interesting, isn't it? 

In addition, to further prepare you for the very serious consequences of being stigmatized, which is the goal of those in power doing the stigmatizing, consider what is described as the conditions to mental dis-orders: "conditions that affect your thinking, feeling, mood, and behaviour". Basically, let us ponder on these examples that may lead to a one way ticket to stigma:

1. Ladies, avoid showing ANY symptoms of PMS, please. Period. 
2. Gentlemen, at the risk of Saskatchewan stereotypes, do not consume drugs or alcohol. Full stop.

However, there is a wide range of mental disorders that are lumped together in one category under the terminology and label that someone is "mentally ill". The Mayo Clinic includes examples that include a wide range such as depression to schizophrenia to addictions. There is too wide of a range that can be interpreted in any way, by anyone, when the word "mental illness" is used. Remember, the term is used to describe mental disorders, which can be anything from a common reaction to stress and trauma, such as anxiety, or to serious mental issues that pose a real danger to others and society, such as psychopaths committing pedophilia and/or murder. 

Image from The National Institute for Mental Health PTSD 

Every profession and professional can experience mental illness, but not suffer from stigmatization due to their position in society. For instance, RCMP officers and healthcare workers experience Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) as do women experiencing Domestic Violence, also known as Intimate Partner Violence (IPV). Currently and particularly in the Court of King's Bench in Saskatchewan, there is ample knowledge and first hand accounts repeatedly being shared -- and as is noted by psychologists, counsellors and sociologists -- that women experiencing PTSD, trauma or anxiety at the hands of their abusers are (or there is an attempt to) stigmatize them as mentally ill as an excuse to award abusers child custody. Yet, no court or community would do the same to a RCMP officer or healthcare worker to prevent them from being a parent. It's as if it's on reserve for certain groups, and it is cuz that's the way stigmatization works, my Lovelies.

Social status matters, as does the current Saskatchewan dominant legal culture. Lawyers and Judges are not exempt from various mental illnesses, and the degrees of severity can also fluctuate in them. After all, we are all human, aren't we?

In 2021, the Ohio Lawyer's Assistance Program (OLAP,) addressed mental illness, or mental disorders, in judges. It is only rational and reasonable that regular risk assessments be made on the judicial, equally and without bias, to monitor the mental health of judges making life altering decisions with court orders. Mental illness can remain hidden. In positions of power, for a high powered career, maintenance is required. Monitoring systems that involve periodical psychological assessments for those with judicial power, and making life altering decisions that affect lives, need to be implemented:

We have heard about the dangers of mental illness for attorneys, but now it is time to shed light on judges... It is a judge's job to provide competent guidance to the public, but an undiagnosed mental disorder could affect the way he or she decides a case. It is important that judges seek help... ~ Scott R. Mote, Esq, O-lap (emphasis mine.)

What It Means to Be Stigmatized

Figure 3 taken from  Evidence synthesis Structural determinants of stigma 
across health and social condition: a rapid review and
conceptual frameworkto guide future research and intervention

There is a process to becoming stigmatized, which I shall elaborate on in future blog posts. In an article entitled Evidence synthesis: Structural determinants of stigma across health and social condition: a rapid review and conceptual framework to guide future research and intervention, stigma is described as being:

enabled by social, economic and political inequities, through which negative labels, beliefs and perceived differences between groups can culminate in discrimination and status loss.

Basically, what it means to be stigmatized is to be forced into a social and cultural process by the power of authorities who label you, place you in a category, deteriorate your quality of life and hyper-monitor your every move. Seriously.

The goal with the process of stigma is to ensure a person loses status through enforcing discrimination - and falsehoods in many instances - by the current social, economic and political powers. This process involves differences, or perceived differences, between cultures with power imbalances. The article written by Bolster-Foucault et al elaborates that "As Link and Phelan wrote, "...stigma exists when elements of labelling, stereotyping, separation, status, loss and discrimination occur together in a power situation that allows them" to (Bolster-Foucault et al, 2021). If they can get away with it, they will achieve their agenda.

Collectively, let's not allow it in Saskatchewan child custody cases where abusers are awarded custody and their victims and targets are stigmatized. That's just not reasonable, nor showing sound judgment and a healthy mental capacity. Stay tuned for part two...

Sources:

Bolster-Foucault, Clara; Ho Mi Fane, Brigitte; Blair, Alexandra, PhD. March 2021. Evidence synthesis: Structural determinants of stigma across health and social conditions: a rapid review and conceptual framework to guide future research and intervention.

Mote, Scott R. October 2021. Judges and secondary traumatic stress: What to do about it. Ohio Lawyers Assistance Program, USA.