Sad Psychiatry Quotes

My sadness is beautiful. It infuses everything I do. It is at the core of my identity and always has been, just as happiness is in some people. I refuse to be told that it's a flaw. I will not mute it with medications for the sake of society. I will hold it close to me and celebrate it rightfully while the rest of the world fails to see it for what it is and it will be their loss.

Sadly, psychiatric training still includes far too little on the very serious psychiatric sequelae of childhood trauma, especially CSA [child sexual abuse]. There is inadequate recognition within mental health services of the prevalence and importance of Dissociative Disorders, sufferers of which are frequently misdiagnosed as Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD), or, in the cases of DID, schizophrenia. This is to some extent understandable as some of the features of DID appear superficially to mimic those of schizophrenia and/or Borderline Personality Disorder.

Multiple personality [Dissociative Identity Disorder] should also not be confused with alternations of mood from happy to sad, characteristic of the cyclic temperament. These are merely emotional swings; personality splits are far more comprehensive.

Sometimes I get so sad that it jest sounds good.

They safely cured the world of sadness, wiser the Pfizer for it?

Psychopathic individuals have a neurobiologic impairment in the ability to recognize and process fear and sadness in the facial expressions or voices of other people. It's as though they're blind and deaf to the pain of those around them.

It is the sad privilege of medicine, and especially that of psychiatry, to ever witness the weaknesses of human nature and the reverse side of life.

The daily reading of good books can be a remedy for sadness, comfort in distress, and a helpful way to foster hope and fortitude.

The word psychiatry derives from Greek roots meaning “soul doctoring”—a noble enterprise. Sadly, psychiatry today has lost touch with its roots. It is now dominated by the biomedical model, which attributes all disturbances of mental and emotional health to imbalances of brain biochemistry, correctable by medication. Big Pharma has taken great advantage of this by marketing an array of drugs to treat depression, anxiety, and major mental illnesses.

Avoidance or merely the passage of time will not necessarily make the emotion dissipate. It is simply not true that time automatically heals all wounds.

Due to commercials and the “education” of prescribers directly by pharmaceutical representatives, the idea that people who were sad and depressed had chemical imbalances in their brains became common parlance. So how is this an example of manufacturing a disease? There is no such thing as a chemical imbalance that is known to cause some identifiable disease called depression. In fact, leaders within psychiatry have called the chemical imbalance theory an “urban legend” that was never taken seriously by “well-informed psychiatrists” (Pies, 2011). An entire society was led to believe in a disease known to be caused by neurochemical imbalances as a direct result of a genius marketing scheme, and nothing more (see also Schultz & Hunter, 2016 for a review).

Going to therapy and talking about healing may just be the go-to flex of our time. It is supposedly an indicator of how profoundly self-aware, enlightened, emotionally mature, or “evolved” an individual is. Social media is obsessed and saturated with pop psychology and psychiatry content related to “healing”, trauma, embodiment, neurodiversity, psychiatric diagnoses, treatments alongside productivity hacks, self-care tips and advice on how to love yourself without depending on anyone else, cut people out of your life, manifest your goals to be successful, etc. Therapy isn’t a universal indicator of morality or enlightenment. Therapy isn’t a one-size-fits-all solution that everyone must pursue. There are many complex political and cultural reasons why some people don’t go to therapy, and some may actually have more sustainable support or care practices rooted in the community. This is similar to other messaging, like “You have to learn to love yourself first before someone else can love you”. It all feeds into the lie that we are alone and that happiness comes from total independence. Mainstream therapy blames you for your problems or blames other people, and often it oscillates between both extremes. If we point fingers at ourselves or each other, we are too distracted to notice the exploitative systems making us all sick and sad. Oftentimes, people come out of therapy feeling fully affirmed and unconditionally validated, and this ego-caressing can feel rewarding in the moment even if it doesn’t help ignite any growth or transformation. People are convinced that they can do no wrong, are infallible, incapable of causing harm, and that other people are the problem. Treatment then focuses on inflating self-confidence, self-worth, self-acceptance, and self-love to chase one’s self-centered dreams, ambitions, and aspirations without taking any accountability for one’s own actions. This sort of individualistic therapeutic approach encourages isolation and a general mistrust of others who are framed as threats to our inner peace or extractors of energy, and it further breeds a superiority complex. People are encouraged to see relationships as accessories and means to a greater selfish end. The focus is on what someone can do for you and not on how to give, care for, or show up for other people. People are not pushed to examine how oppressive conditioning under these systems shows up in their relationships because that level of introspection and growth is simply too invalidating. “You don’t owe anyone anything. No one is entitled to your time and energy. If anyone invalidates you and disturbs your peace, they are toxic; cut them out of your life. You don’t need that negativity. You don’t need anyone else; you alone are enough. Put yourself first. You are perfect just the way you are.” In reality, we all have work to do. We are all socialized within these systems, and real support requires accountability. Our liberation is contingent on us being aware of our bullshit, understanding the values of the empire that we may have internalized as our own, and working on changing these patterns. Therapized people may fixate on dissecting, healing, improving, and optimizing themselves in isolation, guided by a therapist, without necessarily practicing vulnerability and accountability in relationships, or they may simply chase validation while rejecting the discomfort that comes from accountability. Healing in any form requires growth and a willingness to practice in relationships; it is not solely validating or invalidating; it is complex; it is not a goal to achieve but a lifelong process that no one is above; it is both liberating and difficult; it is about acceptance and a willingness to change or transform into something new; and ultimately, it is going to require many invalidating ego deaths so we can let go of the fixation of the “self” to ease into interdependence and community care.

Just as the capacity for experiencing fatigue has evolved to protect us from overexertion, the capacity for sadness may have evolved to prevent additional losses. Maladaptive extremes of anxiety, sadness, and other emotions make more sense when we understand their evolutionary origins and normal, adaptive functions.

Four specific lines of evidence have become standard in psychiatry: symptoms, genetics, course of illness, and treatment. Symptoms are the most obvious source of evidence: most of us focus only on this evidence. Was Lincoln sad? That symptom could suggest depression, but of course one could be sad for other reasons. Symptoms are often nonspecific and thus not definitive by themselves. Genetics are key to diagnosing mental illness, because the more severe conditions—manic-depressive illness in particular—run in families. Studies of identical twins show that bipolar disorder is about 85 percent genetic, and depression is about half genetic (The other half, in the case of depression, is environmental, which is why this source of evidence is also not enough on its own.) Perhaps the least appreciated, and most useful, source of evidence is the course of illness. These ailments have characteristic patterns. Manic-depressive illness starts in young adulthood or earlier, the symptoms come and go (they’re episodic, not constant), and they generally follow a specific pattern (for example, a depressive phase often immediately follows a manic episode). Depression tends to start somewhat later in life (in the thirties or after), and involves longer and fewer episodes over a lifetime. If someone has one of these conditions, the course of the symptoms over time is often the key to determining which one he has. An old psychiatric aphorism advises that “diagnosis is prognosis”: time gives the right answer. The fourth source of evidence is treatment. This evidence is less definitive than the rest for many reasons. Sometimes people never seek or get treatment, and until the last few decades, few effective treatments were available. Even now, drugs used for mental illnesses often are nonspecific; they can work for several different illnesses, and they can even affect behavior in people who aren’t mentally ill. Sometimes, though, an unusual response can strongly indicate a particular diagnosis. For instance, antidepressants can cause mania in people with bipolar disorder, while they rarely do so in people without that illness.