[The medical marking of the body. Or when the physician becomes the stigmatizer].
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
SEARCH · Search PubMed
Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Stress is a term that is readily recognized by everyone but defines rigorous scientific definition. It is widely interpreted as the emotional and biologic responses to novel or threatening situations. In humans, however, the term "distress" seems to be preferable, more clearly defining the fact that is the response that is being referred to, rather than the stimulus. Distress has been postulated to be capable of precipitating an overt illness, as when it occurs coincidentally with an incipient infection or neoplasm. Moreover, it is able to provoke several disorders and symptoms in many tissues and organs, including the skin. In this paper the authors focus on the main characteristics of stress and emphasize the relevance of psychosomatic medicine that proposes the simultaneous examination of psyche and soma. Special consideration is given to a peculiar form of skin disease, psychogenic purpura, together with the stigmata of mystics that, in large part, seem to be conditioned or provoked (or provocable) by emotional stress or by psychic influences on cutaneous fibrinolytic activity.
The "(non-) compliance" is critically reviewed in term of both published research and clinical experience. Underlying assumptions are examined, and assessment problems and relevant theoretical models briefly reviewed. The Self-Regulation Model is outlined in some detail as a basis for both clinical interventions and research. Attention is drawn to the potential for prejudice and stereotyping as a result of the application of a negative evaluative label like "non-compliance". It is concluded that "(non-) compliance" is a mythical construct and proposed that the evaluatively neutral, non-judgmental, term self-management behaviours be substituted. Directions for further research are outlined.
BACKGROUND: Many individuals with schizophrenia are stigmatized by society. It is necessary to understand the factors contributing to stigma. This study investigated the relation of symptoms and other patient characteristics with perceived stigmatization in patients with schizophrenia. METHOD: Sixty patients with schizophrenia were included in the study. Symptomatology was assessed with the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale. Perceived stigmatization was measured by several questions which were included in the World Health Organization-Disability Assessment Schedule-II (WHODAS-II). Patients were grouped as positive or negative for perceived stigmatization. Characteristics of patients and severity of symptoms were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The results showed that patients who reported to perceive stigmatization had more severe symptoms than the patients who did not perceive stigmatization. Positive symptoms and general psychopathology scores were significantly higher in the group perceiving stigmatization. Patients reporting stigmatization were significantly more disabled than the group negative for perceived stigmatization. Demographic variables were not different between the two groups. Stepwise regression analysis showed that depression and active social avoidance were the items which could predict the perception of stigmatization. CONCLUSION: The relation between perception of stigmatization and symptoms is a vicious circle in which the elements reinforce each other. Interruption of this circle will increase the adaptive abilities and decrease the disability of these patients.
BACKGROUND: There are studies that either deal with the stigmatization patients anticipate or with patients' concrete stigmatization experiences. Up until now, however, research is short of studies that investigate both aspects of subjective stigmatization simultaneously. AIMS: This study aims at investigating to what extent patients with schizophrenia or depression anticipate and experience stigmatization and how this is influenced by the type of mental disorder and the social environment. METHOD: A total of 210 patients with schizophrenia or a depressive episode were interviewed, one half living in a city and the other in a small town. RESULTS: Most of the patients expect negative reactions from the environment, particularly as concerns the access to work. Concrete stigmatization experiences were most frequently reported in the domain of interpersonal interaction. Even though schizophrenia patients and patients with depression anticipated stigmatization similarly frequently, the former reported concrete stigmatization experiences more frequently than the latter. Conversely, patients living in a small town anticipated stigmatization more frequently than patients from the city, even though both had actually experienced stigmatization at a similar rate. CONCLUSION: The results underline the necessity to differentiate between anticipated and experienced stigmatization. This is highly relevant for planning interventions aimed at reducing the stigma of mental disorder.
We identified a tobacco stigma-specific gene, designated STIG1. The STIG1 gene is developmentally regulated and expressed specifically in the stigmatic secretory zone. We used a chimeric STIG1-GUS gene to show that the stigma-specific STIG1 gene expression pattern is controlled primarily at the transcriptional level. We constructed a stigma-specific cytotoxic gene by fusing the STIG1 gene 5' regulatory region with the coding sequence of the Bacillus amyloliquefaciens barnase gene, to assess the role of the stigmatic secretory zone in the pollination process. Pistils of transgenic STIG1-barnase tobacco plants undergo normal development, but lack the stigmatic secretory zone and are female sterile. Pollen grains germinate on the ablated 'stigmatic' surface, but are unable to penetrate the transmitting tissue of the style. Application of stigmatic exudate from wild-type pistils to the ablated surface increases the efficiency of pollen tube germination and growth and restores the capacity of pollen tubes to penetrate the style. Our data demonstrate the importance of the stigmatic secretory zone in the pollination process and provide an approach to identify compounds produced by the stigma that are critical for successful pollination and fertilization to occur.
OBJECTIVE: To assess attitudes of relatives of mentally ill patients to psychiatric research, especially to early detection of schizophrenic psychosis, and to evaluate the potential stigmatization effect of an early diagnosis of schizophrenic psychosis. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to relatives of mentally ill patients, all members of a self-help group in Switzerland. They were asked to answer structured questions about their personal attitude to psychiatric research in general, their willingness to support an affected person to participate in a research project, their attitude to early detection of schizophrenia and to the potential stigmatization of an early diagnosis. RESULTS: 88% of the relatives (n = 200) have a positive attitude to research in psychiatry. 47% would support their affected family member to participate in a research project whereas 39% would not. 52.5% fully share the expectation of psychiatric research to attain a better course by earlier detection of psychosis, 24.5% tend to agree. 20.5% of the respondents indicate a fear of stigmatization for the affected by earlier diagnosis, while 12% fear stigmatization for themselves. CONCLUSIONS: A surprising fact is the positive attitude of relatives to psychiatric research in general, but also to early detection of schizophrenic psychosis. But this cannot lead to the conclusion that relatives are supporting the participation of an affected family member in research. The small number of relatives that fears a stigmatization by earlier diagnosis of schizophrenic psychosis shows that stigmatization depends on other factors than the diagnosis, i.e. psychiatric hospitalization or medication side effects. These findings encourage psychiatric research to increase knowledge of the early phase of schizophrenia in favor of patients and their relatives.
QUESTION: The goal of this study is to investigate the stigma of mental illness from the perspective of the persons directly affected by it. METHOD: 210 patients with schizophrenia or major depression were questioned about anticipated and concrete stigmatization experiences, using a questionnaire especially developed for this study. RESULTS: Most of the patients expected negative reactions from the environment. Three quarters were convinced that their job application would be rejected when it became known that they are mentally ill. Almost two thirds felt apprehensive that others would avoid them due to their illness. There is hardly any difference between schizophrenia and depressive patients' assessment of stigmatization of mentally ill people. Concrete stigmatization experiences were most frequently reported in the domain of interpersonal interaction. Second comes the distorted picture of mentally ill people that is depicted in the media and experienced as hurtful by the patients. The obstacles to access social roles (partnership, work, etc.) perceived by the patients come third. Participants least frequently mentioned structural discrimination, i. e. disadvantages regarding psychiatric treatment or rehabilitation measures. Contrary to anticipated stigmatization, there are differences between the two diagnostic groups when it comes to concrete stigmatization experiences. Schizophrenia patients more frequently report that others would avoid contact with them and that the access to social roles was especially complicated for them. They also seemed to be more exposed to structural discrimination than depressive patients. CONCLUSION: Based on the results of this study, ways are discussed of how stigmatization and discrimination of mentally ill people can be reduced.
In an attempt to define stigmatization from the perspective of stigmatized group members, the author focused on the development and validation of a stigmatization scale. The scale's content validity was established with the assistance of experts in the field. European American, African American, and Native American students from 5 different U.S. universities completed the Stigmatization Scale. The construct validity of the scale was suggested by its convergence with similar measures of social alienation and its divergence from measures of personal subjective well-being. The finding that both the African American and Native American students reported significantly higher stigmatization scores than did the European Americans indicated the scale's known-groups validity. African American students at a predominantly Black university reported lower stigmatization than did African American students at a predominantly White university, suggesting the scale's malleability to context.
BACKGROUND: Stigmatization may prevent effective control of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) in China. Thus, its impact needs to be studied. GOAL: The goal of the study was to explore the effect of perceived stigmatization on control of STDs. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional study was conducted among males attending four STD clinics for the first time for a current STD. RESULTS: Among 406 patients, 80% felt stigmatized, 28% sought treatment only after suffering symptoms for at least 1 week, and 40% reported continuing to have sex while having symptoms. No association was observed between feelings of stigmatization and delay in seeking treatment. Among those married, 77% expressed unwillingness to notify their spouses. Patients who felt stigmatized were less likely to agree to notify their spouses (odds ratio, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.21-0.85). CONCLUSION: Policies are needed to reduce stigmatization, reduce time to treatment, and promote disclosure to sex partners.
OBJECTIVE: This study examined experiences of weight stigmatization, sources of stigma, coping strategies, psychological functioning, and eating behaviors in a sample of 2671 overweight and obese adults. RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES: The total sample was partitioned into two subsamples for investigation. Sample I was comprised of 2449 adult women, and Sample II was a matched sample of adult men and women (N = 222) that was disaggregated to investigate gender differences. Both samples completed an online battery of self-report questionnaires measuring frequency of weight stigmatization and coping responses to deal with bias, the most common sources of the bias, symptoms of depression, self-esteem, attitudes about weight and obesity, and binge eating behaviors. RESULTS: Experiences of weight stigmatization, in many forms and across multiple occasions, was common in both samples. A variety of coping strategies were used in response. More frequent exposure to stigma was related to more attempts to cope and higher BMI. Physicians and family members were the most frequent sources of weight bias reported. No gender differences were observed in types or frequency of stigmatization. Frequency of stigmatization was not related to current psychological functioning, although coping responses were associated with emotional well-being. DISCUSSION: These findings raise questions about the relationship between stigma and psychological functioning and have important implications for obesity treatment and stigma reduction intervention efforts, both of which are discussed.
QUESTION: This study provides an overview of the research on subjective stigmatization of mentally ill people. METHOD: All articles on this topic that have been published since the mid 1980 were analyzed. RESULTS: Mentally ill people are exposed to stigmatization in many ways. The anticipated and experienced stigmatizations as well as their attempts chosen for coping have fatal effects on their social relationships, their working situation, and their quality of life. The same is true for the emotional well-being and the self-esteem of the ill. In addition, the fear of stigmatization has a negative effect on the help seeking behavior and the compliance of the ill with the psychiatric treatment. CONCLUSION: Efforts aimed at reducing stigmatization of mentally ill people should not be confined to fighting the discrimination objectively existing, but should also take into consideration the subjective stigma experiences of the persons affected.
In recent years reforms were instituted in the Federal Republic of Germany that were designed to facilitate the integration of psychiatric services and psychiatric patients into community life. One goal of this reform was to reduce patients' feelings of stigmatization. Because such feelings were thought to arise through patients' tenure at large, isolated state hospitals, we hypothesized that patients sent to such hospitals would feel more stigmatized than would patients assigned to a modern, integrated university hospital. Further, we hypothesized that patients in the two settings would adopt different strategies to cope with the stigma they perceived and that staff members in the two settings would share patients' views concerning these matters. Although we found that the staff in both hospitals shared our prediction that state hospital patients would perceive more stigmatization, our findings showed just the opposite. State hospital patients were significantly less likely than university hospital patients to believe that most people would devalue and discriminate against mental patients. Nor did we find strong evidence of different styles of coping with stigma among patients in the two settings. Taken together, our results suggest that in the realm of stigmatization well-intentioned efforts of reforms may have had undesirable unanticipated consequences. Given this, we suggest approaches for intervening more directly with patients in the form of "Daily Living Groups," which are designed to explicitly discuss actual and feared stigmatization.
In Brassica self-incompatibility, the recognition of self/nonself pollen grains, is controlled by the S-locus, which encodes three highly polymorphic proteins: S-locus receptor kinase (SRK), S-locus protein 11 (SP11; also designated S-locus Cys-rich protein), and S-locus glycoprotein (SLG). SP11, located in the pollen coat, determines pollen S-haplotype specificity, whereas SRK, located on the plasma membrane of stigmatic papilla cells, determines stigmatic S-haplotype specificity. SLG shares significant sequence similarity with the extracellular domain of SRK and is abundant in the stigmatic cell wall, but its function is controversial. We previously showed that SP11 binds directly to its cognate SRK with high affinity (K(d) = 0.7 nM) and induces its autophosphorylation. We also found that an SLG-like, 60-kD protein on the stigmatic membrane forms a high-affinity binding site for SP11. Here, we show that the 60-kD stigmatic membrane protein is a truncated form of SRK containing the extracellular domain, transmembrane domain, and part of the juxtamembrane domain. A transiently expressed, membrane-anchored form of SRK exhibits high-affinity binding to SP11, whereas the soluble SRK (eSRK) lacking the transmembrane domain exhibits no high-affinity binding, as is the case with SLG. The different binding affinities of the membrane-anchored SRK and soluble eSRK or SLG will be significant for the specific perception of SP11 by SRK.
BACKGROUND: Many studies as well as clinical experience indicate that patients often feel stigmatized by their psoriasis and may experience rejection due to their skin disease. METHODS: In this study of connections between feelings about having psoriasis, rejection by others, and the impact on work experience, alcohol use, and psychiatric help-seeking, 100 adults with moderate to severe psoriasis responded to a specially designed questionnaire. Multiple regression analysis is used to determine whether, and how, rejection experience and stigma feelings are associated with the three psychosocial outcomes after controlling for psoriasis severity. RESULTS: Nineteen percent of the subjects experienced 50 episodes of gross rejection as a result of their psoriasis, most often from a gym, pool, hairdresser, or job. Rejection experience leads to feeling stigmatized, which is then associated with help seeking and, to some degree, with interference with work. Rejection can lead to feeling stigmatized and to increased alcohol consumption, but the data show that patients may drink without conscious awareness of their feelings. CONCLUSIONS: When patients experience psoriasis-related rejection, they may feel stigmatized and suffer further adverse effects on their emotional and occupational life. It is urgent that ways of helping people deal with the impact of psoriasis, its stigmatizing potential, and the consequences of psoriasis-induced rejection be emphasized.