A note on terminology

Clumsy though it appears, I tend to use "ex-user/survivor". "User", because this denotes an element of complicity, at least in the early days of our engagement with system, and "survivor", to moderate this with the knowledge that any control we might have had over the terms of our engagement is short-lived. "Consumer", on the other hand, implies a level of complicity and autonomy way beyond that which is experienced by most people who come into contact with psychiatry, and has a rather Orwellian ring to it. I'll take my hat off (and shake my head in confusion) to anyone who finds referring to themselves this way empowering.

One word I would like see used more in this context is "injury", as opposed to illness, disorder or disability. "Injury" highlights the role of external factors, recognises the need for assistance, and connotes the possibility of healing. You trip on a cobblestone, cut your knee badly, and need to go to the ER for some painkillers and to get it stitched up. No one would infer from this that your condition had a strictly internal cause (at most, you're a bit clumsy, but these footpaths are dangerous) or, because you received an analgesic, that it was caused by a lack of codeine in your body.

Likewise, it takes into account the experiences of those who view the cause of their situation in largely psychosocial terms, yet take anti-depressants or other kinds of psychotropic medications. The pills are equivalent to the bandage or the sutures, or at worst, to the pin in the leg that was crushed by a tractor. If they work, they work - but they don't imply that serotonin re-uptake plays a causal role, merely that it may be a consequence of earlier psychological injury.