Self-Care Series - Excerpt

Here is an overview of my initial findings:

1) The world cannot agree on the medicalization, epidemiology, and treatment of burnout, despite the progress in the conceptualization of burnout by the World Health Organization (WHO), the American Medical Association (AMA), and Maslach (who created the Maslach Burnout Inventory or MBI).

2) The medicalization vs. over-medicalization debate is convoluted due to risks and opportunities in the areas of economic, political, cultural, and physiological. Bioethics and biopolitics identify pharmaceuticals and a negative workplace environment as having high stakes in the game.

3) There is global urgency to help support workers in the public service sector.

4) There are far more factors at play than meets the eye in determining the epidemiology of burnout

5) Burnout continues to be a medical-cultural controversy

Self-Care Series - Excerpt from Post #1

“The nature of the work, which often involves helping individuals manage mental health issues, substance use issues, trauma, or behavioral health crises, can be emotionally taxing. The behavioral health workforce experiences high levels of work-related stress, relatively low salaries, high student debt, and full caseloads. These combined factors place individuals working in the behavioral health field at high risk for experiencing burnout. Over 50 percent of behavioral health providers report experiencing symptoms of burnout,”

(Kelly, Hearld, 2020).