Boarderline seems blurry at times...

I found that the line between anti-psych and recovery from mental illness have a blurry boundary. I wonder if anyone here can help me find better definition.

I posted a link to an interesting article that seems to boarder the line:

http://www.power2u.org/articles/recover ... e_can.html

Exiled found another article on that site "Do's and Dont's of Recovery", which was similarly boarderline from what I can tell. On one hand, these articles promote the idea of "fully" recovering such that meds are not needed. This seems anti-psych, but then they discuss the healing process and the need for medications, especially at early stages of treatment. This seems more like conventional recovery methods that involve meds. So it seems like they might have got the best (or worst) of both worlds?

There are those of us who are reasonable about this and would prefer for us to learn to cope with what's wrong, and then there are those who are just spreading nonsense and want to take everything to extremes. The border between the two may seem blurry, but that's because they two overlap. Just like what I want overlaps with psychiatric treatment, in that, if it helps you to cope while you learn to cope, I do think you should do meds until you're able to help yourself if it indeed helps you.

motionissue wrote:There are those of us who are reasonable about this and would prefer for us to learn to cope with what's wrong, and then there are those who are just spreading nonsense and want to take everything to extremes. The border between the two may seem blurry, but that's because they two overlap. Just like what I want overlaps with psychiatric treatment, in that, if it helps you to cope while you learn to cope, I do think you should do meds until you're able to help yourself if it indeed helps you.

Thanks - that makes pretty good sense.