by Del Rapier

The concept of abnormality first assumes a dichotomous system in which normality is the preferred option and all that lies outside normality is deemed abnormal. This simplistic, but all to common, methodology for defining abnormality is problematic at best. Such a system of categorizing presumes a singular definition of normality, leaving all deviations or alternative forms of expression subject to categorization as deviant or abnormal. Often normality is decided upon by those who are among the dominant majority of a given culture or system. As such, normality often leaves very little space for expressions of diversity, let alone eccentricity. Within this definition of normality, abnormality can often be little more than that which makes those within the dominant majority experience discomfort, therefore perpetuating the marginalization of minority and alternative communities.

In looking at normality and abnormality as a continuum, rather than a binary system, a reframing of abnormality is possible, allowing for diverse ways of being without seeking to denigrate such behavior. One example is the Icarus Project which seeks to redefine what it means to live with mental illness. Movements such as this offer an example of the benefits of reframing abnormality in such a way as to move away from a model which stigmatizes abnormality, and therefore the individual.

Clearly, from a psychological perspective, abnormality does exist in the sense that there are behaviors, attitudes, and patterns of thought which can create ongoing stress and disruption to one’s ability to function day-to-day. As such, it is important to be aware of the severity of affect such abnormality has on a client. At the same time, a clear understanding of ones own biases is just as important when determining whether a client’s abnormality is truly creating a disturbance to their ability to function or is simply a different form of expression.