Tijdschrift voor psychiatrie · 2026
[Mental suffering requires a clinical stance of encounter. A reflective essay].
Аннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
van Os J J
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Mental suffering lies at the heart of psychiatric practice but is often approached as a disorder, defect, or symptom – thereby eclipsing the lived experience itself.
AIM: To explore how mental suffering can be re-understood as a human experience in context, and what this implies for clinical attitude.
METHOD: Reflective essay based on literature, philosophical analysis, and clinical experience.
RESULTS: Mental suffering does not appear as a brain defect but as a disruption of human coherence -embodied, affective, relational, and temporal. It emerges when the natural continuity between past, present, and future falters, and a person temporarily loses their orientation in the world. Suffering is contextually embedded – in body, biography, relationships, and society – and may manifest as powerful, coercive, or opaque. Not all suffering is transparent or meaningful, yet each instance calls for presence and understanding. The clinical encounter becomes a shared hermeneutic space where experiential and professional knowledge complement and correct each other.
CONCLUSION: Mental suffering calls not for repair but for recognition; not for reduction but for presence and dialogue. A clinical stance grounded in listening, resonance, and co-bearability – understanding rather than explaining – creates room for the restoration of coherence, meaning, and humanity.
AIM: To explore how mental suffering can be re-understood as a human experience in context, and what this implies for clinical attitude.
METHOD: Reflective essay based on literature, philosophical analysis, and clinical experience.
RESULTS: Mental suffering does not appear as a brain defect but as a disruption of human coherence -embodied, affective, relational, and temporal. It emerges when the natural continuity between past, present, and future falters, and a person temporarily loses their orientation in the world. Suffering is contextually embedded – in body, biography, relationships, and society – and may manifest as powerful, coercive, or opaque. Not all suffering is transparent or meaningful, yet each instance calls for presence and understanding. The clinical encounter becomes a shared hermeneutic space where experiential and professional knowledge complement and correct each other.
CONCLUSION: Mental suffering calls not for repair but for recognition; not for reduction but for presence and dialogue. A clinical stance grounded in listening, resonance, and co-bearability – understanding rather than explaining – creates room for the restoration of coherence, meaning, and humanity.