Mentalism (discrimination) - Origin of Terms

Origin of Terms

The term 'mentalism' emerged in the 1970s out of the psychiatric survivors movement, mentioned specifically by Judi Chamberlin in the book "On Our Own", published in the United States in 1978. People began to recognize a pattern in how they were treated, a set of assumptions which most people seemed to hold about mental (ex)patients regardless of whether they applied to any particular individual at any particular time – that they were incompetent, unable to do things for themselves, constantly in need of supervision and assistance, unpredictable, likely to be violent or irrational etc. It was realized that not only did the general public express mentalist ideas, so did ex-patients, a form of internalized oppression.

As of 1998 the term had been adopted by some consumers/survivors in the UK and the USA, but had not gained general currency. This left a conceptual gap filled in part by the concept of 'stigma', which allegedly focuses less on institutionalized discrimination with multiple causes, but on whether people perceive mental health issues as shameful or worse than they are. Nevertheless, a body of literature demonstrated widespread discrimination across many spheres of life, including employment, parental rights, housing, immigration, insurance, health care and access to justice.

The term 'psychophobia' (from psyche and phobia) has occasionally been used with a similar meaning, and may also refer to a general fear of the depths or potential of the mind.

The term 'sanism' has been attributed to US lawyer Michael Perlin, but he has stated that to the best of his knowledge it was coined by Morton Birnbaum, as in a book and legal case from the 1970s. Birnbaum was a physician, lawyer and mental health advocate who helped establish rights to treatment along with safeguards against involuntary commitment. He died in 2005. Perlin says he has been relying on the term 'sanism' for the past 20 years, including in published papers since the early 1990s.

The use of new "isms" in this way has nevertheless been questioned on the grounds that they can be perceived as divisive, out of date, or a form of undue political correctness. The same criticisms, in this view, may not apply so much to broader and more accepted terms like 'discrimination' or 'social exclusion'. There is also the umbrella term ableism, referring to discrimination against those who are (perceived as) disabled. In terms of the brain, there is the movement for the recognition of neurodiversity.