Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters











Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Psychiatr Serv ; 56(5): 557-63, 2005 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-15872164

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This article discusses examples of structural stigma that results from state governments' enactment of laws that diminish the opportunities of people with mental illness. METHODS: To examine current trends in structural stigma, the authors identified and coded all relevant bills introduced in 2002 in the 50 states. Bills were categorized in terms of their effect on liberties, protection from discrimination, and privacy. The terms used to describe the targets of bills were examined: persons with "mental illness" or persons who are "incompetent" or "disabled" because of mental illness. RESULTS: About one-quarter of the state bills reviewed for this survey related to protection from discrimination. Within that category, half the bills reduced protections for the targeted individuals, such as restriction of firearms for people with current or past mental illness and reduced parental rights among persons with a history of mental illness. Half the bills seemed to expand protections, such as those that required mental health funding at the same levels provided for other medical conditions and those that disallowed use of mental health status in child custody cases. Legislation frequently confuses "incompetence" with "mental illness." CONCLUSIONS: Examples of structural stigma uncovered by surveys such as this one can inform advocates for persons with mental illness as to where an individual state stands in relation to the number of bills that affect persons with mental illness and whether these bills expand or contract the liberties of this stigmatized group.


Subject(s)
Human Rights/legislation & jurisprudence , Mental Disorders/psychology , State Government , Stereotyping , Humans , United States
2.
Community Ment Health J ; 40(4): 297-307, 2004 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-15453083

ABSTRACT

This study tests a social psychological model (Skitka & Tetlock, 1992). Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 28, 491-522; [1993]. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 65, 1205-1223 stating that policy maker decisions regarding the allocation of resources to mental health services are influenced by their attitudes towards people with mental illness and treatment efficacy. Fifty four individuals participated in a larger study of education about mental health stigma. Participants completed various measures of resource allocation preferences for mandated treatment and rehabilitation services, attributions about people with mental illness, and factors that influence allocation preferences including perceived treatment efficacy. Results showed significant attitudinal correlates with resource allocation preferences for mandated treatment, but no correlates to rehabilitation services. In particular, people who pity people with mental illness as well as those that endorse coercive and segregated treatments, were more likely to rate resource allocation to mandated care as important. Perceived treatment efficacy was also positively associated with resource allocation preferences for mandated treatment. A separate behavioral measure that involved donating money to NAMI was found to be inversely associated with blaming people for their mental illness and not being willing to help them. Implications of these findings on strategies that seek to increase resources for mental health programs are discussed.


Subject(s)
Attitude to Health , Health Care Rationing , Mental Disorders , Mental Health Services/economics , Resource Allocation , Stereotyping , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Mandatory Programs , Maternal Welfare , Mental Disorders/rehabilitation , Mental Disorders/therapy , Psychology, Social , Surveys and Questionnaires , Treatment Outcome , United States
3.
Psychiatr Serv ; 55(5): 577-80, 2004 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-15128968

ABSTRACT

This study examined how two types of public education programs influenced how the public perceived persons with mental illness, their potential for violence, and the stigma of mental illness. A total of 161 participants were randomly assigned to one of three programs: one that aimed to combat stigma, one that highlighted the association between violence and psychiatric disorders, and a control group. Participants who completed the education-about-violence program were significantly more likely to report attitudes related to fear and dangerousness, to endorse services that coerced persons into treatment and treated them in segregated areas, to avoid persons with mental illness in social situations, and to be reluctant to help persons with mental illness.


Subject(s)
Health Education , Mental Disorders/psychology , Stereotyping , Violence , Adult , Coercion , Female , Helping Behavior , Humans , Male
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL