Labelling – does it help or hurt? Anxious. Depressed. Suicidal. Autistic. Dyslexic.
These are just some labels that name certain conditions that we have become all too familiar with. In a society and cultural context wherein labels hold so much power, it is perhaps useful to understand the impact that these words have on the human being it is attached to.
What’s in a label? In the contemporary framework, wherein we seem to thrive upon creating labels and storing things neatly away into categories and boxes, it is beneficial to have a good grasp of the phenomenon. Labels are “defining terms used to describe something or someone,” and “a word people can identify with […] that is a generalisation of a group of people, a behaviour or a belief.”
There is no denying the utility of a label, but it is not always so simple and can have adverse effects. Case in point, having a label doesn’t help one move past the diagnosis in the case of mental health diagnoses.
Contemporarily, we tend to use some of these labels very flippantly.
How many times have we heard someone say “I’m so depressed!” after a mildly distressing day? Or off-handedly say “I want to kill myself,” after a minor inconvenience? Even worse, some of these labels are meant to be insulting towards others. In these instances, and in general, do we still spare a thought about the implications of the power behind these words?
For some, getting a diagnosis is a saving grace – having a starting point and a way forward is beneficial for some and provides comfort. For others, it is a sentence and a source of more distress. Despite efforts and initiatives taken, a considerable amount of stigma still surrounds these classifications.
Why not label? It is no secret that labels, unfortunately, come with the heavy load that is a stigma.
Even though the conversation around mental health is expanding, individuals diagnosed still find themselves smeared with an abundant layer of the stigma that sticks and follows them around and give rise to certain expectations, both within themselves and others in their confront.
Moreover, putting a label on something and having an overall understanding of it, doesn’t translate into understanding the individual and their subjective experience, nor does it guarantee that the appropriate course of treatment – if available – is taken.
Within the wider societal context, some may say that individuals with disorders use the labels attributed to them as an excuse. If adequate information is provided and the individual doesn’t attain an understanding of their situation, they might attribute other feelings and/or behaviours to the disorder and thereby may be lumping multiple issues together.
As a result of the stigma and expectations that arise when labelling, people around those labelled sometimes engage in discrimination against these individuals. Another effect of the expectations that arise, this time within the individual themselves, is the feeling that they will inevitably live up to their label, a phenomenon known as the self-fulfilling prophecy as described by Merton. Contrariwise, others may put pressure on themselves to oppose the stereotypes associated with the label assigned to them.
So, with all this in mind, why is it that we still offer these diagnoses and attribute these labels?
Be it for psychological disorders, learning disabilities, and even in the case of “positive” labelling, there are certain expectations that arise within individuals as a result.
There are also quite a few positives to the process, which have kept diagnoses being generated. For instance, the allocation of a label and conceptualising a diagnosis allows for facilitated communication with professionals the individual may be working with.
For some, putting a name to the condition, and having a way forward is relieving. It also creates an umbrella term and so simplifies communication with others with reference to what the label addresses. With the unlimited resources available today, the label enables one to find and understand information on their condition.
While it is true that labels, more so the stigma associated with them, can isolate one from the general population, they may also provide a community of similar individuals and may help normalise the experience and encourage understanding amongst peers. Perhaps the biggest pro to the labelling process is that it enlightens professionals and sufferers alike as to the treatment that is most appropriate.
Research also shows that the perception of the diagnosis varies according to the label attributed.
If the diagnosis made is of a transient or improvable state, the diagnosis was accepted more easily and the attitude towards the label was less challenging. When, however, the diagnosis targets an intrinsic factor, such as personality, the response was far less positive and resistance to accepting the diagnosis was observed. Context is also very important when supplying this critical information. Supplying ample information and potential plans are likely to lead to positive reception.
It is important to understand that a label only explains and defines one specific set of behaviours and not the person as a whole. Having a condition doesn’t make the person synonymous with that condition. Thus, despite the lure of “simplicity” in ascribing labels, it is important to look past the label and conceptualise the label with regards to the individual as a whole.
