Rajkumar Ravi Philip
Department of Psychiatry, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research, Pondicherry, India.
Front Psychol. 2021 Apr 9;12:646334. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.646334. eCollection 2021.
The COVID-19 pandemic has had a widespread effect on the thoughts, emotions and behavior of millions of people all around the world. In this context, a large body of scientific literature examining the mental health impact of this global crisis has emerged. The majority of these studies have framed this impact in terms of pre-defined categories derived from psychiatric nosology, such as anxiety disorders, depression or post-traumatic stress disorder. These constructs often fail to capture the complexity of the actual experiences of the individuals being studied; more specifically, they describe these experiences exclusively in terms of disease, while neglecting their potentially adaptive or "salutogenic" aspects. Similarly, discussion of psychological assistance for these individuals has largely been confined to a reiteration of "evidence-based" psychological or pharmacological techniques which can be delivered using remote access technology. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, these approaches are likely to be of mixed efficacy. Conversely, "negative emotions" or distressing psychological experiences may actually be functional in the setting of a disaster or crisis, serving to minimize harm, maximize social coherence and compliance, and facilitate adherence to safety measures. The limitations of the "conventional" approach are, to a certain degree, inherent to the prevailing medical model of mental health. Beyond these considerations lies the concept of "salutogenesis," a term which refers to the innate capacity of individuals to create and maintain health and well-being in the face of adversity. Using principles derived from the second wave of positive psychology (PP2.0), particularly its emphasis on the totality of human experience and the possibility of deriving meaning and character growth from suffering, this paper conceptually analyses the relevant aspects of salutogenesis and PP2.0, and proposes an alternate approach for addressing mental health concerns during the COVID-19 pandemic. Such an approach, while acknowledging the utility of the conventional medical-psychotherapeutic model in specific cases, reduces the risk of medicalizing human experience, and provides individuals and communities with opportunities for growth and adaptation. The benefits of this proposal could potentially extend far beyond the current crisis, offering an opportunity for the field of psychiatry and mental health research to move away from a purely "disease-centered" model.
新冠疫情对数以百万计的全球民众的思想、情绪和行为产生了广泛影响。在此背景下,大量研究这一全球危机对心理健康影响的科学文献涌现出来。这些研究大多依据源自精神疾病分类学的预定义类别来界定这种影响,比如焦虑症、抑郁症或创伤后应激障碍。这些概念往往无法捕捉被研究个体实际经历的复杂性;更具体地说,它们仅从疾病角度描述这些经历,而忽略了其潜在的适应性或“健康生成性”方面。同样,针对这些个体的心理援助讨论很大程度上局限于重申可通过远程访问技术提供的“循证”心理或药物技术。在新冠疫情背景下,这些方法的效果可能参差不齐。相反,“负面情绪”或令人痛苦的心理经历在灾难或危机背景下实际上可能具有功能性,有助于将伤害降至最低、使社会凝聚力和合规性最大化,并促进对安全措施的遵守。“传统”方法的局限性在一定程度上是当前心理健康医学模式所固有的。除了这些考虑因素之外,还有“健康生成”的概念,该术语指个体在面对逆境时创造并维持健康和幸福的内在能力。本文运用源自积极心理学第二波(PP2.0)的原则,特别是其对人类全部经历的强调以及从苦难中获得意义和性格成长的可能性,从概念上分析了健康生成和PP2.0的相关方面,并提出了一种在新冠疫情期间应对心理健康问题的替代方法。这种方法在承认传统医学 - 心理治疗模式在特定情况下有用性的同时,降低了将人类经历医学化的风险,并为个人和社区提供了成长和适应的机会。这一提议的益处可能远远超出当前危机,为精神病学和心理健康研究领域摆脱纯粹的“以疾病为中心”模式提供了契机。