My Perspective on Advocacy and Mental Health
Recently, I came across a thought-provoking comment on LinkedIn by Joseph R. El-Khoury, which struck a deep chord with me as a social worker and mental health advocate. He stated:
“Some of the worst enemies of psychiatry come from within the profession and cause the most damage. Throughout history, psychiatry has been one of the professions that has evolved the most since its inception. It has embraced new theories and rejected discredited ones. There is a fine line between engaging in critical thinking and sowing doubt… Stigma against psychiatry is stigma against mental health.”
As a licensed clinical social worker (LCSW), I see firsthand the impact of psychiatric interventions—both the immense good they can bring and the skepticism they often face. Psychiatry, like social work, is constantly evolving, yet it is frequently criticized, sometimes even from within. There is a fine balance between questioning outdated practices and undermining the entire field, and unfortunately, social media has become a breeding ground for the latter.
Social Work and Psychiatry: A Shared Mission
Social work and psychiatry share a common goal: to support, empower, and heal individuals struggling with mental health challenges. Our approaches may differ—social work focuses on systemic, environmental, and psychosocial factors, while psychiatry often leans on medical and neurological insights—but they are complementary rather than contradictory.
I, too, am proud of my profession and grateful for the advances in mental health care that allow us to integrate medication, psychotherapy, neuromodulation, and holistic approaches. Yet, I see a troubling pattern: some mental health professionals contribute to public distrust by diminishing the value of psychiatric interventions. In doing so, they unintentionally fuel stigma and limit the resources people are willing to explore for their well-being.
The Danger of Internal Divisions
As El-Khoury points out, psychiatry has embraced new evidence-based treatments while rejecting ineffective or harmful ones. Social work, too, has evolved—we’ve moved away from outdated models and embraced trauma-informed care, peer support, and evidence-based therapies. However, when professionals within the field engage in divisive rhetoric rather than constructive discourse, it erodes trust in the very systems designed to help people.
This extends beyond psychiatry. As social workers, we often critique systemic issues—healthcare access, social determinants of health, and racial or socioeconomic disparities. But when critique becomes all-encompassing condemnation, we risk losing credibility and failing to advocate effectively.
Advocating for Mental Health Without Undermining the Profession
Criticism should serve a purpose: to improve, not to dismantle. Thoughtful critique of psychiatric practices is necessary—especially regarding issues like overmedication, misdiagnosis, and accessibility—but we must do so in a way that advances, rather than discredits, mental health care.
As a social worker, I advocate for a balanced approach. I support psychiatry, just as I support therapy, peer-driven models, and holistic approaches. Mental health is not one-size-fits-all, and the more tools we have, the better. But we must also recognize that attacking one tool in the toolbox—whether it be medication, therapy, or psychiatric treatment as a whole—ultimately harms the people we are meant to serve.
A Call for Unity in Mental Health Advocacy
Rather than drawing battle lines within our profession, let’s work together to ensure psychiatry, social work, psychology, and peer-driven models remain strong, ethical, and accessible. Let’s challenge outdated practices while uplifting the ones that work. Let’s educate the public, rather than fostering doubt. And most importantly, let’s remember that the real fight isn’t against each other—it’s against stigma, suffering, and the barriers preventing people from getting the help they need.
To all my fellow mental health professionals: How do you navigate this balance between critique and advocacy? Let’s continue this conversation.