In recent years, the field of psychology has undoubtedly made a lot of progress in the understanding and treatment of mental health conditions. However, amidst this progress, are we finding ourselves, as mental health professionals, over-pathologizing individuals in therapy?
We are all guilty of bias. The training we go through as clinical psychologists, our knowledge and experiences influence the kind of choices we make in therapy. As clinical psychologists, we are trained to analyse and interpret human behaviour through a clinical lens, which even though is invaluable, can at times overshadow a holistic view of our clients. Pathologizing refers to the tendency to view an individual’s thoughts, feelings and behaviours solely from the perspective of diagnosing them. Now, while this can provide valuable insight and direction, it should not be the only focus of therapeutic intervention.
Abraham Maslow’s quote, “If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail”, seems to resonate deeply in the context of mental health. Human psychology is complex and there are a multitude of factors that influence how we think, feel, and behave. Making quick judgements as mental health professionals based on a simple presentation of what appears wrong may cause us to miss the underlying issue. It might also lead us to focus solely on problems and overlook the client’s strengths, resilience, and potential for growth.
As a clinical psychologist myself, I’ve come to realise the limitations of pathologizing in therapy and have tried to navigate the balance between acknowledging the validity of diagnostic frameworks and recognizing their disadvantages. Adopting an affirmative, strengths-based approach that acknowledges one’s capacity for change and emphasises inherent resources has been my approach to therapy, and in doing so, I have witnessed the profound impact of the same on clients.
In embracing this approach, we not only challenge the stigma that is associated with mental illness but also acknowledge and celebrate the diversity there is in human experiences. Expanding on this idea of embracing diversity, it is therefore important to acknowledge that a one-size fits all approach to therapy is not only ineffective but could also be potentially harmful. We should strive to create a space that is more inclusive, which respects the unique backgrounds and experiences of all individuals.
Therapy thus becomes a journey that is collaborative on the part of the client as well as the therapist, where work is done for the purpose of self-discovery and growth, where the client feels validated, supported, and understood. Through this reframing of our approach to therapy, we can create a space for clients to explore who they are, and cultivate a sense of purpose and meaning in their lives.
So, while diagnostic frameworks have their place in psychology, they should be complemented with a more holistic approach that is person-centred and not problem-centred. By shifting focus from pathology to possibility, we can create a therapeutic space where clients explore their experiences, develop insight, and cultivate coping skills, rather than dwelling on narrowly focusing on diagnoses.