Posts by inmi1

by Rev. Alan Johnson

One of the glaring gaps in our resources for people who are living with a mental health challenge, is that they don’t know where to go or with whom they can talk about their mental health or that of a loved one.  Other than with a medical professional, that is.

You see, the stigma around mental illness has silenced people.  It is a blanket that covers over the pain that is lived, and the stigma is a closet that causes many people to withdraw into silence. And the silence is isolating,

While it is important for a person who are living with a serious mental illness to have resources such as a psychiatrist who prescribes medication, a counselor who offers talk therapy, a family and/or a strong friend or two who are supportive, a faith community, and meaningful work or voluntary opportunities — there may still be something missing.

What is often missing is a confidential support group of persons who are affected by a mental health challenge. I have found many people open up to me regarding their mental health when they know that I am receptive and non-judgmental, that I have been affected myself, and that I continue to learn more and more about mental health along the way including new resources. However, where there is a safe enough place where people can share their agonizing and sometimes blessed journey in the world of mental health, there is a healing that begins.  When the silence is broken, the hurts can be attended to.

Over the past 5 years I have had the privilege of being one of the organizers and facilitators of such a group. It is the Spiritual Support Group for Mental Health and Wellness. We have created a strong structure for the meeting along with guidelines. What happens is that people come regularly or when they feel the need, and in the confidential space there is a sacredness that becomes real.  In the hearing and the sharing of stories, strength is given though the tears and the laughter.

Where do you go?  With whom do you talk and listen?

Alan Johnson

Interfaith Network on Mental Illness

The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the submitter. They do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the board of directors or members of the Interfaith Network on Mental Illness.

by Joanne Kelly

Do you ever get excited about a book or movie and want all your friends, relatives, work colleagues – heck, even the pizza delivery guy — to read it or see it? That’s how I feel about “Tattoos on the Heart: The Power of Boundless Compassion.” This moving book, written by Father Gregory Boyle, a Jesuit priest and master storyteller, takes us inside Homeboy Industries and shows us how it transforms the lives of gang members in Los Angeles by offering them jobs, community, acceptance and compassion.

The stories he tells will make you laugh so hard you cry, and cry so hard your heart splits open.

The gang members call Father Gregory “G.” Here’s G’s definition of compassion:

“Compassion is not a relationship between the healer and the wounded. It’s a covenant between equals. … Compassion is always, at its most authentic, about a shift from the cramped world of self-preoccupation into a more expansive place of fellowship, of true kinship.”

With G’s stories swirling in my head, I realized I had an opportunity to move more fully from a place of empathy with those who struggle with mental illnesses into that more expansive place he describes. I am not quite sure yet how it will look, but I am open to its unfolding in my life.

How about you? Are you open to looking at yourself and your beliefs in a new light? I invite you to read the book and email me with your thoughts about it and how it affects your views on compassion.

Joanne Kelly

Interfaith Network on Mental Illness and Caring Clergy Project

The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the submitter. They do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the board of directors or members of the Interfaith Network on Mental Illness.

by Joanne Kelly

I recently stumbled across a definition of mental illness (thanks to a short video produced by NAMI Montana that is making the rounds on social media) I hadn’t heard before, and it’s one that resonates with me.

They define mental illness as “chronic disruption of the neural circuits of the brain.” The video goes on to say that the disrupted neural circuits affect the functioning of the brain, which in turn affects how a person thinks, feels and acts. Those disrupted neural circuits can dramatically affect a person’s interpretations of life events, even to the point where they sense things that aren’t there (hallucinations) or believe things that aren’t true (delusions).

Why do I like this definition? It is clear and straightforward.  A 12-year-old can understand it. If your wiring is chronically disrupted, your thoughts, feeling and actions can be chronically disrupted. There’s no hint of judgment or blame.

Just as when the circuits in your pancreas are chronically disrupted, it can stop producing sufficient insulin. As a result, your blood glucose levels can skyrocket, which can lead to extreme fatigue and irritability. It also is a biological disruption that manifests in changed behavior.

Yet I have never heard of a faith leader attributing diabetes to personal sin, while there’s no shortage of faith leaders who attribute mental illness to sin. I’ve never heard of a faith leader suggesting that if you were only more diligent in your spiritual practice you would not need to be treated for your diabetes, but the minister of a church I attended for many years made that claim about mental illness from the pulpit one Sunday.

Of course there is an element of personal responsibility that is necessary for managing both mental illnesses (brain disorders) and diabetes (pancreas disorders). But let us – as faith communities and as individuals — recognize the confluence of biological and environmental factors that contribute to these disorders and offer people who suffer from them (and other illnesses) the support and acceptance they need.

Joanne Kelly

INMI co-founder and board treasurer

The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the submitter. They do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the board of directors or members of the Interfaith Network on Mental Illness.

by Joanne Kelly

Good news!

The White House is working on launching a national dialog on mental health to address the social barriers preventing people from seeking mental health services – particularly the shame, fear and misperceptions that surround mental illness and mental health services. The dialog will begin on June 3 at the White House Conference on Mental Health, and President Obama and Vice President Biden are both scheduled to attend the event.

More good news:

I have been invited to attend the conference to represent INMI. In addition, INMI Chair Rev. Alan Johnson has been invited to attend as the representative for the United Church of Christ Mental Health Network, which he also leads.

Why are we excited about the conference? We believe that individuals, faith communities, and federal, state and local governments share a moral obligation to promote the common good and protect and serve our society’s most vulnerable members, which includes people with mental illnesses and their families.

At present, we are not doing a very good job of fulfilling that moral obligation. We stigmatize people with mental illnesses, discriminate against them in housing and jobs, deny them adequate treatment for their illnesses and then punish them by throwing them in jails and prisons when their symptoms get out of control to the point where they break laws. It is truly a crazy way to treat anyone, much less people who are ill and need help.

We are heartened that the current administration is devoting time and energy to this critical topic, and we have high hopes that the dialog will prove fruitful. Conference attendees will include educators, mental health professionals, and representatives from faith communities and mental health organizations. With a large number of key players at the table, the potential for a positive impact is high.  While the lion’s share of the action will probably come from those who are in attendance, the federal government has a large part to play in ensuring the availability of mental health services and enabling funding for those services.

Joanne Kelly

Interfaith Network on Mental Illness

Co-founder and board treasurer

The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the submitter. They do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the board of directors or members of the Interfaith Network on Mental Illness.

by Joanne Kelly

My Buddhist friend Dhyan sent me this story and gave me permission to share it with you:

Long ago I had a friend named Jack, who was a graphic designer and worked out of his house. He did some logo work for me once upon a time.

I remember the first time I came to his townhouse as a client, I saw a big “Compared to What?” sign over his computer. Naturally I had to ask him what that was about.

Jack was Buddhist and shared many of the same learning experiences I had had. He told me he wanted to remember that the depth of your suffering was directly connected to the alternative to which you were comparing your situation.  When we say something is “awful, terrible, depressing” it is because we are comparing it to another state of being, which we find more pleasing and desirable, and somehow think we are entitled to have.

Jack taught me that the amount of suffering we go through in life is directly related to our tendency to look at our current situation and find it lacking.

I have never forgotten Jack’s over-the-computer-reminder. Nor him, actually, although we have not been in touch for many years. He and his wife gave birth to a beautiful daughter who was born with a severe sensitivity disorder.  Almost all sensation was intolerable to her.  She cried for the first three years of her life, pretty literally, all hours except when she was asleep, and she didn’t sleep much. Either her father or her mother held her constantly for three years and that was the only comfort she had. She finally got to the point where she could tolerate being put down, having clothing against her skin and taking baths (she didn’t have her hair washed for the first 3 years of her life – surprisingly it didn’t look all that bad!). Through it all her parents were incredibly patient.

Jack used to bring his then-4-year-old-daughter over to my house and we would have tea parties under the hawthorn tree in the park. She loved that!  She also loved to climb up into the loft of my house and I was the first person ever that she happily stayed with apart from one of her parents. Jack casually said he was going to go get some coffee one day. She and I were dressing one of my dolls up in the loft at the time and she just said “Okay, Dad, bye!”  This was after several months of our playing together with Jack slowly being farther and farther away – at the far end of the loft, at the bottom of the ladder, down in my living room, and finally out of the house.

Jack had more than the usual opportunities for comparison with others and with other situations and to find his own lacking but he didn’t go there. That made a huge impression on me. He loved his daughter and he stayed very even-keeled about the extreme challenges. By the time she was school age, because of the tender care of both of her parents, her doctors and therapists, she was not only able to attend school, she attended regular school, and by second grade she was mainstreamed successfully.

What can we learn from this inspiring story? If you have a mental illness or have a family member or friend with a mental illness, it can be tempting go through life as if we have a “Woe is Me” sign hanging over our desks. I know I have held that mindset from time to time. But starting today, I’m trading it in for a “Compared to What?” sign.

How about you? What does the sign over your desk say?

Joanne Kelly

Interfaith Network on Mental Illness

Co-founder and board treasurer

The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the submitter. They do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the board of directors or members of the Interfaith Network on Mental Illness.

by Joanne Kelly

Back in February, Rev. Alan Johnson wrote a blog post titled “Words matter: How should we talk about mental illness?” Now, we are happy to report that others are realizing words matter: In early March, The Associated Press added an entry to its style book that will guide journalists through the sticky wicket of reporting on people with mental illnesses. Even more exciting, it goes beyond the topic of using words appropriately.

“It is the right time to address how journalists handle questions of mental illness in coverage,” said AP Senior Vice President and Executive Editor Kathleen Carroll. “This isn’t only a question of which words one uses to describe a person’s illness. There are important journalistic questions, too.

“When is such information relevant to a story? Who is an authoritative source for a person’s illness, diagnosis and treatment? These are very delicate issues and this Stylebook entry is intended to help journalists work through them thoughtfully, accurately and fairly.”

I applaud the Associated Press for taking this step. I encourage everyone to read the AP Stylebook entry and incorporate its guidelines into the way we talk – and think – about people with mental illnesses. Here’s hoping that faith communities — clergy, staff and lay leaders – will lead the way in taking these guidelines to heart and putting them into practice so all of us can address mental health issues thoughtfully, accurately and fairly.

Joanne Kelly

Interfaith Network on Mental Illness and Caring Clergy Project

The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the submitter. They do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the board of directors or members of the Interfaith Network on Mental Illness.

by Alan Johnson

What a gift we have in Pete Earley.  Having just read Pete’s blog about his testimony to a Congressional committee investigating mental illness and violence, I applaud his fierce honesty in what it is like to be a parent of a person who has a mental illness/mental disorder/brain disorder.  And for him to do that in 4 minutes is remarkable.

I surely get his emotional roller coaster experience, though.  When the lights are shining in your eyes and you have a forum in which to speak to Congress and beyond about how your child’s mental illness has changed your whole family, you can be darn sure that a parent would have some strong emotions.  It could also prompt you to go out and read his book, “Crazy: A Father’s Search through America’s Mental Health Madness.”  In his book, there is clarity and full body contact with the hot issues that are surfacing nationally. Several points from Pete’s blog are particularly noteworthy.

In Colorado, we are now searching for ways to “broaden the standards of involuntary commitment.”  That is at the heart of much of Pete’s writing and testimony.  We all know it is a fine line between a person’s civil rights and the major care that is needed to help a person find the right help.  We wrestle with the language. Is using “substantial risk” the right standard to invoke to warrant a 5-day involuntary commitment rather than just the present 72 hours?  Those 5 days could also be extended to 3 months.  Pete writes, “We need a national dialogue about our existing mental health laws with an eye toward protecting civil rights but also getting people help before they become an imminent danger.”  This is meat of the conversation that is occurring these days.

Another issue Pete writes about in his book is building mental health institutions that do not look at all like the former mental hospitals, most of which are now closed.  Rather, to have institutions that would replace the present “asylums” that are, today, what prisons have become. These new buildings would be places where actual treatment would be offered to the most severely mentally ill persons. Jointly with local community treatment services, which Pete mentions, this path toward recovery would be a way to augment hope.  And hope would be rekindled in people with mental illness.

The Interfaith Network on Mental Illness in Boulder, Colo., has invited Pete Earley to come to speak to our community.  On Saturday, April 13, at 7 p.m. Pete will speak at the University of Colorado Law School, Wolf Building and on Sunday, April 14, Pete will speak at the 9 a.m. and the 10:15 a.m. services at the First Congregational Church, 1128 Pine Street, Boulder.  Pete’s title is “The Criminalization of Mental Illness.” Learn more.

Pete rallies “against the troubled mental health system and for the mentally ill.”  It is incumbent upon those who have been touched with these issues to join Pete’s rally.

Alan Johnson,

Interfaith Network on Mental Illness and Caring Clergy Project

The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the submitter. They do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the board of directors or members of the Interfaith Network on Mental Illness.

by Rev Alan Johnson

“So, I am thinking about how to talk about my….well….my, you know, my mental illness.  I mean, my brain disorder. Well, I don’t know how to describe what it is.”

Words do matter and how we talk about what we experience is important.  It may be that through the years a person’s symptoms have led to a diagnosis, one that is listed in the DSM-IV.  When that becomes clearer, or clear enough, there are ways for these symptoms to be treated, usually by a combination of medications and psych-social-rehab programs.  The major “mental illnesses” listed by the National Alliance on Mental Illness are major depression, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar disorder, autism spectrum disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder, panic and anxiety disorders, and borderline personality disorder.

One of the lively conversations today is around how to talk about these illnesses. “Mental Illness is an illness like any other” is a phrase we have heard. However, that does underestimate the way that most illnesses can be determined.  Diabetes or cancer or heart disease are measurable, based on biological data. “Mental” illnesses are not yet in that category. We go on symptoms, as mentioned above, and we don’t have a brain scan at this time to indicate why these symptoms occur. While treatable, the causes of mental illnesses are not completely known.

Still, there are many who say that mental illnesses are physical disabilities. They are biologically based and arise in some way from the brain. Therefore, we use the medical model of treatment.  “Here are the medications to try in order to alleviate the ‘illness.’” This understanding has at least one enormous benefit.  It may reduce the stigma that is present around “mental illness.”  What has been known as “mental” illnesses can now be called “brain disorders.” It sounds less stigmatizing, removes the burdens of blame for what causes these symptoms, and can empower those who are living with the shadow of self-recrimination to speak and act more openly in society.  Living into that reality, however, still leaves more work to be done.  Some people think the word “disorder” is too clinical and medical.

For instance, when I mentioned that I had been using the words “brain disorder” to describe my son’s mental illness, bipolar disorder, it was very clear to him that this is was not the way that he wanted me to talk about this part of his condition. He said just use “bipolar.” I sincerely apologized because I had not asked him before, and I felt that I had used words that were inappropriate. He is an adult who is fully alive, filled with honed wisdom, has a creative wit, and I deeply love him. He was direct in pointing out that I had erred in his case.

Language can be tricky. It can elucidate things or muddy things. So what can we do?  Keep on keeping on working on language seeking to describe how things are. It will not be perfect since someone will always come up with an “on the other hand” perspective on what you are seeking to make general and universal.  Now I have come to understand even better from my son that perhaps the best thing is to talk with the person who is affected by a “mental illness” or a “brain disorder” or “depression” or “bipolar” or whatever to see how they see it themselves. This is all about relationships anyway. Connecting with someone who is affected by mental illness/brain disorder/etc. may reveal something new and fresh in our own understanding and therefore lessen our perplexity and confusion about our use of language.

Alan Johnson,

Interfaith Network on Mental Illness and Caring Clergy Project

The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the submitter. They do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the board of directors or members of the Interfaith Network on Mental Illness.