What are Mental Health labels?
Mental Health labels are any descriptors of our mental wellbeing or psychological processes, which can include psychiatric diagnoses (e.g. ADHD), non-diagnostic descriptors applied to others (e.g. narcissist) or self-identification. In this blog article, I will focus on psychiatric diagnoses, exploring whether these are helpful or harmful, and inviting readers to reflect on their own diagnoses they may have received, self-diagnosed or considered. I aim to offer a new perspective that draws upon my experience as both psychotherapist and medical doctor in psychiatry.
What are psychiatric diagnoses?
There are two main diagnostic classification systems used within the UK. The official diagnostic classification system in use within the NHS is the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11), which is produced by the World Health Organisation. The second diagnostic classification system is the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-V), which is produced by the American Psychiatric Association. They both have specific criteria to be met before a given diagnosis is made, which are broadly similar between the two systems.
It is my view that diagnostic labels can be both be helpful and harmful, depending on how they are applied and the context in which a diagnosis is made. Before I explore this in more detail, I think it may be helpful to highlight that both diagnostic classification systems were designed for a specific purpose, neither of which were primarily for the benefit of the person to whom a diagnosis is given. The ICD-11 was designed to classify ‘illness’ for research purposes, so that clinicians can offer ‘evidence-based’ care. The DSM-V was designed to stratify ‘illness’ and determining complexity for health insurance purposes.
The extent to which a diagnostic label is helpful is more complex than meeting specific diagnostic criteria. It is a balance between the advantages and disadvantages that such a label confers upon the individual who receives it.
Doctor Divergent, 2026
In recognising that categorisation of a person as a research subject or limitation of reimbursement does little to directly benefit them as an individual, I hope it begins to make sense how someone who is trained to make such diagnoses in one role (psychiatrist), can be hesitant or even averse to making such diagnoses in another (psychotherapist).
How can diagnostic labels be helpful?
There are many people who would argue that the answer to this question is never, and it is important to acknowledge this openly. Arguments that support this viewpoint include uncertainty regarding the pathological processes that underlie mental illnesses or even that such illnesses represent a variant of normal human experience that has been labelled as pathological by a flawed medical model. In my opinion, there is some truth to these arguments, which can sit uncomfortably.
As someone who considers themselves to work in a holistic and ethical way, it is always in the back of my mind that my actions may unintentionally harm others. I do however see the value of diagnostic labels as a means to access ‘something’ which is of benefit to the person receiving the diagnosis, whether that is access to medical care such as medication, or some other nuanced benefit such as a sense of identity and validation.
Diagnostic labels are likely to be helpful when:
- Distress is beyond the limits of ‘normal’: If we consider all human experiences to exist on a spectrum, with ‘symptoms’ and their impact occurring within a normal distribution, I believe there is a point at which such experience may fairly be termed an illness. The cut off for which is not fixed, but determined within the context in which a person exists. This acknowledges that what is a problem for one person may not be so for another person, or that society is the problem rather than the person.
- Such illness is treatable: Whether treatment includes medication, psychotherapy, or some combination of both, it can be helpful to have a roadmap for what treatments are likely to be most effective. For example, for bipolar-type depressive symptoms, typically-used antidepressants are often less effective than treatment with mood stabilisers. Often diagnosis is the only way some treatments can be accessed, such as medication for ADHD.
- A diagnosis is considered desirable: Whilst I reject the view that an ADHD diagnosis is ‘trendy’, ADHD is a good example of a diagnosis that may be considered desirable. A diagnosis can open up possibilities beyond just medication, to offering validation, a sense of identity and access to adjustments that are much needed.
How can diagnostic labels be harmful?
Many clients seek therapy for a specific problem or problems that are causing them distress. Whether or not such distress could be termed an illness is something that I cannot ethically avoid completely, as it is important to acknowledge the limitations of what I can safely offer within this service. I do not routinely diagnose my Doctor Divergent clients, but will answer openly and honestly if this is something they are questioning for themselves.
My reason for this is a recognition of the harm that such diagnostic labels can cause, particularly when given uninvited. Not only do some diagnostic labels carry significant stigma which can be enduring, but they can place limitations on a person’s sense of potential and growth if not handled appropriately and sensitively. This needs to be carefully balanced against any perceived benefit, and it is a nuanced and complex decision to seek and/or make a particular diagnosis.
Unlike other medical diagnoses such as acute appendicitis, it is very hard to ‘reverse’ a mental health diagnosis once given, which can have devastating consequences. The medical profession has a long way to go before parity between physical and mental illnesses will be achieved. People have found themselves ignored and dismissed by medical professionals on the grounds of their mental health diagnosis. A diagnosis can also begin to define a person, taking away their agency.
If treatment with medication is not the aim, there is an argument that all diagnoses have the potential to be harmful, with little added benefit. I find it is often helpful to gently redirect client’s to more self-evaluative processes. What am I thinking and feeling? Why might I think or feel this way? Would I like to think or feel differently, and if so, how might I go about this?
After a diagnosis
A mental health diagnosis can evoke mixed feelings for clients, even when the client themselves have actively sought the diagnosis. For late-diagnosed autistic and/or ADHD clients, it can take time to process past experiences in a new context, leading to uncertainty and confusion. A period of grief is not uncommon, as thoughts of what might have been may begin to surface. When these thoughts and feelings arise, it can be helpful to process these within a supportive therapeutic environment, such as that which we offer at Doctor Divergent.
This article was written by Dr Jackie on behalf of Doctor Divergent Ltd. If you would like to know more about how Doctor Divergent can help you decide whether seeking a diagnosis may be beneficial or process the different feelings that may arise following a diagnosis, then please click here to learn more about our individual therapeutic support.
Leave a Reply