"Having a mental illness is not your fault but it is your responsibility."

[Mixo]

I've been seeing this quote around a lot the last few months. What do you guys think about it, positive, negative, or neither? I'd love to hear your thoughts.

 

[almost_dead]

your birth/life is not ur fault but its your responsiblity

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

I think it's very true.

I liken it to having been abused growing up. It wasn't my fault, but healing from it has always been on my plate whether I want it to be or not. That doesn't mean that I can fully heal, but if I don't take responsibility for what I want, then I won't heal, not to any great degree. No one else can do it for me, though many have helped me and many still do now, right here on the forum. I never stopped looking for answers, and I found many though not all of them. I made huge strides, just as I did with mental illness. In both cases, some avenues I sought did harm, but the fact I was trying was an expression of my strength, desire and capability, which gave me resilience to recover from such experiences and to not give up on my goal.

All humans experience adversity, and our greatest and most valuable accomplishments more often come from overcoming adversity rather than what is natural or easy. It is what builds strong character, which imo not enough people have for there to be a better world. Some of the most admirable people went through the suffering of abuse or mental illness. They refused to let these things define them, met the challenges they presented, and instead they were refined rather than defined by the experiences just as fire and hammering forge iron into a tool, a fence that guards, a support for a structure, a work of art (or even better, a work of art that also has a practical function).

 

[Chupacabra 44]

Meh...........
Whatever ...... Hits me as neutral....

 

[Sensei]

I've been seeing this quote around a lot the last few months. What do you guys think about it, positive, negative, or neither? I'd love to hear your thoughts.

I'm buying it with an addition. Having a mental illness is not your fault, but it's your responsibility to do your best to handle it.

 

[Meditation guide]

I've been seeing this quote around a lot the last few months. What do you guys think about it, positive, negative, or neither? I'd love to hear your thoughts.

It's a nonsense phrase, like saying having Alzheimer's Disease is not your fault but it's your responsibility.

Taking drugs for a mental illness is not without it's challenges which prove to be too much for those either severely ill, or not helped by drugs or therapy.

 

[not4us]

Therapist: It seems like you place the burden of all your failures on others, refusing to take responsibility due to learned helplessness, despite most of your problems being solvable.

Client: Yeah, I get that from my mother.

 

[Mixo]

It's a nonsense phrase, like saying having Alzheimer's Disease is not your fault but it's your responsibility.

Taking drugs for a mental illness is not without it's challenges which prove to be too much for those either severely ill, or not helped by drugs or therapy.

To be honest I'm actually in alignment with this sentiment. I think we live in a world and time where people are in survival mode and are primarily interested in maintaining their own position in the face of so many societal problems and that trickles down to the people who are vulnerable. I read this quote and I think it's a way of saying "Well I'm sorry you have to suffer from mental illness but it's not my responsibility." The likelihood and success of recovery depends a lot on social support and to reduce it to individual responsibility seems reductive to me. Just my opinion though.

 

[Meditation guide]

The likelihood and success of recovery depends a lot on social support

This is so true. Not just with mental illness but all kinds of problems. The environment and people around you have to be supportive, good natured and providing comfort and some enjoyment. Eating dinner with a happy family, having family or friends who help you when you need it, these things are life and death when you have such big hurdles in life.

 

[262653]

I definitely agree with the responsibility part. I think it is the mentally ill who have to live with it, and it is in their interests to deal with it. whether or not they are capable is irrelevant here.

All humans experience adversity, and our greatest and most valuable accomplishments more often come from overcoming adversity rather than what is natural or easy. It is what builds strong character, which imo not enough people have for there to be a better world. Some of the most admirable people went through the suffering of abuse or mental illness. They refused to let these things define them, met the challenges they presented, and instead they were refined rather than defined by the experiences just as fire and hammering forge iron into a tool, a fence that guards, a support for a structure, a work of art (or even better, a work of art that also has a practical function).

About overcoming adversity vs. doing what is natural or easy. I think that humans don't have a choice in the matter, just like a diamond didn't choose to be subjected to intense pressure (challenges, obstacles in life), and someone with strong survival instincts has no choice but to stay alive at all cost no matter what.
A gym rat who grew in a family of athletes, is addicted to feel-good hormones, eats healthy would have easier time sticking to already established lifestyle, habits and good feelings than try to break them.

Basically I'm arguing that everything humans do are natural and easy (or rather, the easiest) individually, and sometimes overcoming adversity is the easiest option, and that everyone happens to be something rather than choosing (freely) to become something.

 

[Worthless_nobody]

To me it's a negative phrase. None of us asked for mental issues but it's our fault anyway? Responsibility for what? (I know they will say therapy, meds, and the usual) In my opinion whether or not someone wants a responsibility should be a choice. Sure it's our "responsibility" to be stuck with it but it's still a choice to do so.

To me this phrase also seems like a way for others to take a hands off approach, not help us and just call us "mentally ill" pointing the finger at things we can't control and using it as a tool for blame. I personally don't like the phrase but I know society will sadly think it's true.

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

I definitely agree with the responsibility part. I think it is the mentally ill who have to live with it, and it is in their interests to deal with it. whether or not they are capable is irrelevant here.


About overcoming adversity vs. doing what is natural or easy. I think that humans don't have a choice in the matter, just like a diamond didn't choose to be subjected to intense pressure (challenges, obstacles in life), and someone with strong survival instincts has no choice but to stay alive at all cost no matter what.
A gym rat who grew in a family of athletes, is addicted to feel-good hormones, eats healthy would have easier time sticking to already established lifestyle, habits and good feelings than try to break them.

Basically I'm arguing that everything humans do are natural and easy (or rather, the easiest) individually, and sometimes overcoming adversity is the easiest option, and that everyone happens to be something rather than choosing (freely) to become something.

Those are some interesting points. You're so on fire lately!

Maybe it's not even the easiest option, but a drive like the drive to procreate. Maybe it's survival of the fittest, while procreation is the survival of the species.

But I also very much see your point about adversity being the easiest option. It was indeed easier for my own personality type to strive to overcome. And there may be some evolutionary or survival value in having the personality type that does not strive, that responds in what may be perceived on the outside, judgmentally, as a weaker or invalid way.

I'm not sure how this relates, just pondering and freewriting here -- a species will seek to thrive when it's not in survival mode, and then can overwhelm the environment and do damage when it thrives too much. But I realize now that there can be thriving in destructive and intense situations, and experience the overcoming sparked by adversity. I'm thinking of the lotus that grows in shit and actually uses the toxicity of the shit for its growth and development to reach the surface and sunlight, and blooms into something beautiful where nothing else can survive let alone thrive. Of course that's a bit of a romantic view; many species developed an advantage by using what other species could not, and the lotus could have found an evolutionary niche in shit. In even the harshest environments, some life form exists. I just read the other day that there may be something like microbial life on Venus -- the environment is so harsh that the toughest probes that have been sent there last only a matter of hours gathering data before they are destroyed, but it's possible something lives there and can handle the intense pressure, likely even thrive in it just like the lotus in shit.

 

[Mixo]

To me it's a negative phrase. None of us asked for mental issues but it's our fault anyway? Responsibility for what? (I know they will say therapy, meds, and the usual) In my opinion whether or not someone wants a responsibility should be a choice. Sure it's our "responsibility" to be stuck with it but it's still a choice to do so.

To me this phrase also seems like a way for others to take a hands off approach, not help us and just call us "mentally ill" pointing the finger at things we can't control and using it as a tool for blame. I personally don't like the phrase but I know society will sadly think it's true.

I don't think it's quite "it's your fault anyway" although I can sense what you mean. I think it's more like "these problems are yours to own." Like another user said above, whether or not you're equipped or capable is another matter. And I'd have to say yes, this is the socially acceptable attitude when it comes to mental illness.

 

[Worthless_nobody]

I don't think it's quite "it's your fault anyway" although I can sense what you mean. I think it's more like "these problems are yours to own." Like another user said above, whether or not you're equipped or capable is another matter. And I'd have to say yes, this is the socially acceptable attitude when it comes to mental illness.

I used that phrase because it's been blamed as my fault over mental issues I had no control over. Sure the problems are own but what's sad is far too many people get blamed for their mental issue because it doesn't fit the norm of society. Bpd for example gets a really bad unfair reputation. And if we try to get better/get help and we still fail it's our fault (this is my personal experience and opinion)

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

Still pondering this subject....

Language does so much. It makes meaning, and humans are meaning-makers, it's part of how we function.

For years I was misdiagnosed as having bipolar, it was actually trauma-based stuff and presented as rapid-cycling bipolar II. Meds did help for a long time, which seemed to affirm the diagnosis (that's how psychiatry often works). But years in, I learned about person-first language. I stopped saying "I'm bipolar" and started saying "I have bipolar." I don't remember if I ever called it "my bipolar." Once I made that shift, I detached from the diagnosis. I talked less about having the condition. It helped me at the time of the diagnosis and several years after to finally have a reason for why I experienced what I did and I appreciated the framework, but when I learned about person-first language, I made a point to stop letting the diagnosis define me. I think that made it easier when over a decade later I went through some therapy processes and experienced significant healing, and took the risk to try getting off the meds. I've been fine without them ever since. I think it helped that the label wasn't part of my identity, so I didn't lose part of myself when I lost the diagnosis, and not calling it "my" bipolar meant it wasn't something I possessed and then lost. It wasn't an object, it was just a condition, and all conditions change, many even completely pass and don't return.

 

[BipolarGuy]

Still pondering this subject....

Language does so much. It makes meaning, and humans are meaning-makers, it's part of how we function.

For years I was misdiagnosed as having bipolar, it was actually trauma-based stuff and presented as rapid-cycling bipolar II. Meds did help for a long time, which seemed to affirm the diagnosis (that's how psychiatry often works). But years in, I learned about person-first language. I stopped saying "I'm bipolar" and started saying "I have bipolar." I don't remember if I ever called it "my bipolar." Once I made that shift, I detached from the diagnosis. I talked less about having the condition. It helped me at the time of the diagnosis and several years after to finally have a reason for why I experienced what I did and I appreciated the framework, but when I learned about person-first language, I made a point to stop letting the diagnosis define me. I think that made it easier when over a decade later I went through some therapy processes and experienced significant healing, and took the risk to try getting off the meds. I've been fine without them ever since. I think it helped that the label wasn't part of my identity, so I didn't lose part of myself when I lost the diagnosis, and not calling it "my" bipolar meant it wasn't something I possessed and then lost. It wasn't an object, it was just a condition, and all conditions change, many even completely pass and don't return.

I find it interesting what you said about the diagnosis stuff and I agree.

I would be interested in getting your thoughts on this:

Years ago I volunteered for a charity that helped high functioning people on the spectrum.
I witnessed lot of people go through the diagnostic process. Some got a diagnosis, some didn't as the symptoms were sometimes found to be caused by other stuff.
Anyway...sometimes what I witnessed is that after someone would get a diagnosis they would kind of adopt it, not just in the sense that they let it define them, but they would almost fit themselves into the diagnosis and it would become part of their identity.
For instance, one guy who admittedly was socially awkward but he could get by, received a diagnosis and all of a sudden he made less eye contact and put himself down more, e.g. by saying "I can't read body language", or whatever. There was other stuff.
It's almost as though he was fitting himself into the diagnostic criteria more so post diagnosis.

 

[SipSop]

There is a average level in wich you can live a decent life if your physical and mental functions work like the average man.
Illnesses make you function below that line.
Everything is more difficult for you.
Imagine being more disavantaged than the average Joe.
In most cases it is not your fault, it is somebody elses fault. And fingers must be pointed to the person at fault. Even to make you feel better if things cannot be changed. Or to get retribution for your life disavantage.
This is your only life, and they fucked it.
Therefore, I conclude that "your responsability" means your unnecessary burden that most people do not have to carry.

 

[262653]

Those are some interesting points. You're so on fire lately!

Damn... that's a lot of pressure. Please, if you can, don't get used to that. Or I don't know, maybe I shouldn't tell you what to do, and it seems unlikely that you did this primarily to pressure me, but to express what you had to say. Just like when I Like/Love someone, I do it to express myself... I guess one could dig a little deeper and explore the possibility where openly expressed approval is meant to encourage the "liked" person to repeat the same behavior or produce the same results in the future...

I cut the bread out of my diet, started eating more of the delicious cheese, and play less video games. I'm not drawing the causal link between anything yet, just saying what is also happening lately.

I want to say a thing or two about freedom of choice, free will and all that. I'm not sure if I should, because I see the potential harm for others in discussing it. (But I will anyway.)

Belief in the freedom of choice might put pressure on someone who's facing an obstacle, the feeling of guilt that rises from such belief may play as a driving force for that person to overcome the obstacle. Someone who doesn't believe in freedom of choice may not feel guilty for not doing anything, which means no driving force, or less sufficient driving force, which may result in not overcoming the obstacle. I guess it's also not always clear whether overcoming each particular obstacle leads to a preferable outcome, but that's another matter.
While I do think that the choices I do are predetermined, and that such notion seems to be more consistent with my subjective experience, I recognize that there might be benefits in believing something that doesn't... appear to be true. I wouldn't want to prevent lotus to thrive by convincing it that I has no choice to do what it has to, even if I genuinely believe that I speak the truth (in case my conviction would make a negative impact) unless I'm interested in hampering its growth, of course.

I guess you could say that my first response was rather emotionally driven: "Not everyone has the resources to thrive in adversity." Because I felt that you were saying that everyone has, but not everyone makes the choice to use them.

But years in, I learned about person-first language.

Interesting. I wasn't familiar with this concept until now. I can definitely see myself almost in all cases use "is" instead of "has".

 

[Life_and_Death]

To me it's a negative phrase. None of us asked for mental issues but it's our fault anyway? Responsibility for what? (I know they will say therapy, meds, and the usual) In my opinion whether or not someone wants a responsibility should be a choice. Sure it's our "responsibility" to be stuck with it but it's still a choice to do so.

If I could I'd make my parents pay for everything then get the best therapists in the country lol

 

[xLosthopex]

I don't like this quote at all. I think it's ignorant. First of all, many of us will live with our mental illnesses chronically which many people don't seem to want to accept that this can be a life long disability. Secondly, even though many mental health conditions are treatable, access to such treatment isn't always available, if for example that person can not afford it financially. I know my mental illnesses, especially the likes of my Anorexia, OCD and BPD are chronic conditions that I will have for the rest of my life, they will never be cured. And besides how is this our 'responsibility' ? We are the ones living with these conditions and we don't owe anyone 'recovery' or 'wellness'

 

[Sprite_Geist]

It would depend on the context in which it is being used.

Psychological issues such as mental illnesses can sometimes be caused by abuse or mistreatment from others. If that is the case then it should not be your responsibility. Why should you take ownership of trauma that you did not cause and want, but instead was inflicted upon you by someone else? For example: if you unlawfully kill someone then you will be held accountable, because you are the perpetrator of the heinous crime not the victim.

 

[woxihuanni]

It is true, with the caveat that there is no magic wand. Sitting in a shrink's couch won't make you 'well' if you are currently in a situation where you don't meet any of your basic needs or are still being abused. Further, this sort of thing is unexceptionally levelled at people suffering the consequences of abuse, never at abusers. 'This is the way he/she is, you can do nothing but walk away from them cut your losses' is the only thing for abusers. Umm, guess what, nope? Just like pedos when they do pedoing don't get off with 'what can you do, just walk away', neither should anybody with any personality disorders. Search me for the details of the implementation of measures against their abuse when there is no bruise marks, however there is a single good real life example I've seen:

Woman quits job, moves to Alaska from another state to marry some NPD guy. She's sent her things over, about to buy a ticket and disovered she is pregnant. She calls him to give the news. Only to learn she's dumped because he met some girl at a party that very night. She goes over to pick her things, miscarries her child with grief because he is already hanging out with the new girl as she has to stay there arranging to go back (To what? nothing. She's quit everything.)

Alaska is apparently a well-knit community at the time. News get out, he is disowned by his family, fired from his job, ostracised by his friends, dumped bby new girl. He never has any life worth living ever, ever again.

This is how he was not responsible handling his NPD, and how he was checked in his fucking tracks.

 

[OnlyTheWind]

I don't like how it implies that I need to try to fix it instead of choosing to die. If you want to cling to life and make the most of it, then sure.

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

I guess one could dig a little deeper and explore the possibility where openly expressed approval is meant to encourage the "liked" person to repeat the same behavior or produce the same results in the future...

No pressure! I enjoy what I enjoy while it lasts, and I've been enjoying. It was an expression of that enjoyment and of respect.

I guess you could say that my first response was rather emotionally driven: "Not everyone has the resources to thrive in adversity." Because I felt that you were saying that everyone has, but not everyone makes the choice to use them.

Yeah, I went back and read what I wrote and I saw how it came across. It was also emotional, and I didn't make space for other perspectives. Your response helped me to see that, and to acknowledge and consider them.

The quote we're discussing in this thread provokes emotional response, and I can totally get how some people would hate it, I have no knee-jerk to them doing so.

It's annoying because it increasingly makes it hard for me to fit in anywhere. Even here I sometimes feel different than other users for whatever reason...Whether intentionally or not sometimes I just have to be a nonconformist about everything even if that thing itself is inherently nonconformist

I so feel this.

 

[Sk1n1M1n]

I try to view the illness seperately from the problems of life, otherwise it can feel like a self pity party and it gives people a reason to sit and dwell.

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

Further, this sort of thing is unexceptionally levelled at people suffering the consequences of abuse, never at abusers.

This is a really interesting perspective to me. These are the thoughts it inspired.

First, I haven't come across the quote in any discourse or heard it leveled at anyone, it simply resonated with an attitude I've held for decades. I just makes sense to me, but I can see how it bothers some, because it has elements of myth that support those in power and tap into emotions and symbols that stir one up akin to patriotism, so I need to check in with myself about why I feel stirred up by it and ask myself, what illegitimate power am I reifying? What bullshit did I just buy into unawares?

Second, when I read books about, say, controlling people or high conflict people, I know when I come across something that resonates because of what I've done or a pattern I've had, and it's really uncomfortable. Then it's time to work on myself now that I have awareness. I have the backbone to face that about myself, while my mother and others with narcissistic traits generally do not. When shame is not toxic, it is an excellent motivator for improvement; I don't wand the discomfort of being "that kind of person," and once I'm aware, then I'm going to feel that discomfort until I change my behavior and the underlying toxic beliefs that previously validated it.

Any abuser, or should I say, someone who abuses as a dominant pattern in certain or all relationships, started out an innocent child whose boundaries were severely overridden in some way by someone who had power over them, whether a caretaker or someone who entered an emotional, physical, mental and/or spiritual space inappropriately and did great harm (with the exception of psychopaths, who have a different brain chemistry, but not all of them become abusive, and environment may still play a role in its development). The one who is abusive is responsible for recognizing and changing it, even if they didn't cause it, and if they don't change it, whether out of ignorance or intention, they may experience extreme consequences for not doing so, such as arrest and imprisonment, or revenge from a victim's family member.

We both agree there is a lot of crap in Buddhism, but I have great respect for the five precepts and have integrated them into my moral compass for my own conduct and interpreting others' conduct. I read a description of them that resonated with me. It said that the precepts are not rules but a guide for interacting with others, that each is a gift one gives to others so that they will not experience fear, oppression or hostility, and that it is notable that most people who are imprisoned for breaking laws broke a precept: stealing, lying, killing, crossing sexual boundaries, or intoxication, which lowers inhibitions such that one is more likely to break a precept and/or be victim to one who does not keep precepts. The precepts also purify because they help one to recognize wrong they have done or that was done to them, and the precepts can then be (re)committed to. Personal responsibility is inherent in this. Mental illness can inhibit one's ability to follow precepts, and this, I think, is why madness is one of the rational Stoic reasons for suicide, because one is inhibited from being able to practice virtue -- which is equally about recognizing we are social beings who co-inhabit shared spaces with others and need to give the gift of restraint in order to do no harm. Virtues are meant to make life flow more smoothly in relation to others as well as the self, because the rational being, which all humans are according to the Stoics, fits more comfortably and "rightly" within the self when practicing virtues.

 

[_Minsk]

i wouldn't use this one on someone who is struggling tbh..

 

[woxihuanni]

This is a really interesting perspective to me. These are the thoughts it inspired.

First, I haven't come across the quote in any discourse or heard it leveled at anyone, it simply resonated with an attitude I've held for decades. I just makes sense to me, but I can see how it bothers some, because it has elements of myth that support those in power and tap into emotions and symbols that stir one up akin to patriotism, so I need to check in with myself about why I feel stirred up by it and ask myself, what illegitimate power am I reifying? What bullshit did I just buy into unawares?

Second, when I read books about, say, controlling people or high conflict people, I know when I come across something that resonates because of what I've done or a pattern I've had, and it's really uncomfortable. Then it's time to work on myself now that I have awareness. I have the backbone to face that about myself, while my mother and others with narcissistic traits generally do not. When shame is not toxic, it is an excellent motivator for improvement; I don't wand the discomfort of being "that kind of person," and once I'm aware, then I'm going to feel that discomfort until I change my behavior and the underlying toxic beliefs that previously validated it.

Any abuser, or should I say, someone who abuses as a dominant pattern in certain or all relationships, started out an innocent child whose boundaries were severely overridden in some way by someone who had power over them, whether a caretaker or someone who entered an emotional, physical, mental and/or spiritual space inappropriately and did great harm (with the exception of psychopaths, who have a different brain chemistry, but not all of them become abusive, and environment may still play a role in its development). The one who is abusive is responsible for recognizing and changing it, even if they didn't cause it, and if they don't change it, whether out of ignorance or intention, they may experience extreme consequences for not doing so, such as arrest and imprisonment, or revenge from a victim's family member.

We both agree there is a lot of crap in Buddhism, but I have great respect for the five precepts and have integrated them into my moral compass for my own conduct and interpreting others' conduct. I read a description of them that resonated with me. It said that the precepts are not rules but a guide for interacting with others, that each is a gift one gives to others so that they will not experience fear, oppression or hostility, and that it is notable that most people who are imprisoned for breaking laws broke a precept: stealing, lying, killing, crossing sexual boundaries, or intoxication, which lowers inhibitions such that one is more likely to break a precept and/or be victim to one who does not keep precepts. The precepts also purify because they help one to recognize wrong they have done or that was done to them, and the precepts can then be (re)committed to. Personal responsibility is inherent in this. Mental illness can inhibit one's ability to follow precepts, and this, I think, is why madness is one of the rational Stoic reasons for suicide, because one is inhibited from being able to practice virtue -- which is equally about recognizing we are social beings who co-inhabit shared spaces with others and need to give the gift of restraint in order to do no harm. Virtues are meant to make life flow more smoothly in relation to others as well as the self, because the rational being, which all humans are according to the Stoics, fits more comfortably and "rightly" within the self when practicing virtues.

I don't disagree with anything here. The precepts are there in all religions, though, plus held by everyone who has no religion. Hardly anybody would say lying or losing control through substance abuse is OK. As for suicide because of madness, his grandfather had at least the guts for that. He was a daughter rapist, beater, alcholic and he hanged himself.

Mental disease is of course handed down generations in multiple ways. However, none of it is an excuse for torturing me systematically which he again and again confessed to doing (and blaming me for it, too!).

 

[esse_est_percipi]

I'm not sure what the 'but it is your responsibility' clause adds, apart from subtly re-shifting the blame and guilt back onto the subject so that whoever pronounces it can assert their will and dominance.

I mean, imagine if this was said of an illness like cancer or aids.
"Having lung cancer is not your fault but it is your responsibility".

Um, ok. I guess it's your responsibility in the trivial sense that anyone's life is their own responsibility, but It seems out of place to say this in the context of an illness. Seems like a way of immediately attenuating/extinguishing the compassion expressed in the first part of the sentence, so that a power dynamic of inter-personal dominance can be quickly reasserted by whoever pronounces it.

It callously diminishes whoever it is aimed at.

How about "having a mental illness is not your fault, and I'll help you through it whatever it takes"?

 

[262653]

i wouldn't use this one on someone who is struggling tbh..

Yeah, I didn't even bother to think about the context where such phrase would be appropriate or about the intentions of whoever say it, until I read more comments. I feel like the quote was compressed so that the structure sounds good, but it gains in vagueness, and with it, more room for interpretation and... well, it may be hard to agree on something when it's not even clear if we talk about the same thing.

"It's not your fault, but it's your responsibility". There's a literary term for the way the phrase is built, but I don't remember what it was.