Eating Disorder Recovery Evangelism Dismisses The Complex Reality of Eating Disorders
In the realm of eating disorder recovery, there exists a subset of individuals and organizations known as "eating disorder recovery evangelists." While their intentions may be well-meaning, their approach to supporting individuals on their journey towards healing often falls short. This blog post aims to shed light on the shortcomings of these evangelists and advocate for a more comprehensive and compassionate approach to eating disorders.
What is an eating disorder evangelist?
Eating disorder evangelists are groups who approach eating disorder recovery in a moralistic manner, lacking a clear understanding of what recovery and proper eating disorder support truly involves and demands. Their focus tends to be solely on constructing support systems for individuals who are actively pursuing recovery, without considering the broader spectrum of experiences and challenges.
Furthermore, these individuals and groups often advocate for abstinence from disordered eating behaviors without taking into account the realistic feasibility for every individual. Their approach lacks consideration for the socioeconomic factors that contribute to health inequality and can impact an individual's ability to access necessary resources for recovery. By disregarding these systemic barriers, they inadvertently perpetuate health disparities and hinder progress in the recovery journey.
Moreover, some eating disorder recovery evangelists refuse to acknowledge that an eating disorder healthcare system driven by profit is not the ultimate solution. Many navigate as reformists seeking to create minor changes to access and diversifying healthcare staff but with no genuine interest in making eating disorders a liberatory political matter. Instead, they may support coercive or carceral treatment models that prioritize compliance over compassionate care. By failing to recognize the flaws of a profit-driven system, they neglect the need for a complete shift in medicine and eating disorder healthcare.
The Moralistic Lens and Lack of Understanding:
One of the key issues with eating disorder recovery evangelists is their tendency to view recovery through a moralistic lens. They may fail to fully comprehend the complexities and unique experiences that individuals face on their journey towards survival and healing. By reducing eating disorders to matters of personal choice or character flaws, these groups undermine the deep-rooted political, psychological and emotional issues that contribute to these conditions. Consequently, their approach can inadvertently lead to blaming and shaming individuals, which is counterproductive to fostering a supportive environment.
Narrow Focus on Active Recovery:
Eating disorder recovery evangelists often focus solely on constructing support systems for individuals who are actively pursuing recovery. While it is crucial to provide support during this phase, it is equally important to recognize that recovery is not a linear process. Some individuals may not be ready or able to commit to recovery at a particular point in time, and others may experience setbacks along the way. An inclusive approach acknowledges those not seeking abstinence still needing non-judgemental support (such as harm reduction education) and that recovery is deeply personal and respects the autonomy and timing of each individual's journey.
Neglecting Socioeconomic Factors:
An aspect that is frequently overlooked by eating disorder recovery evangelists is the influence of socioeconomic factors on an individual's process. While these groups passionately advocate for abstinence from disordered eating behaviors, their approach often fails to consider the socioeconomic factors that contribute to health inequality. Recovery requires access to various resources, including time and affordable and specialized treatment options, mental health support, and proper nutrition. Neglecting these systemic barriers undermines the effectiveness of recovery efforts and perpetuates health disparities.
Profit-driven Healthcare System:
Another critical blind spot for some eating disorder recovery evangelists is their refusal to acknowledge that an eating disorder healthcare system driven by profit is not the ultimate solution. The commodification of healthcare often prioritizes financial gains over individual well-being, leading to a one-size-fits-all approach to recovery. However, the recovery journey is highly individualized and necessitates a comprehensive and holistic approach. Ignoring the detrimental effects of a profit-driven system only perpetuates the flaws within the healthcare system and hampers true progress in recovery efforts.
A Call for Comprehensive and Compassionate Support:
Eating disorders are a complex and deeply personal journey that requires understanding, compassion, and comprehensive support systems. To truly support individuals on their path to healing or survivorship (people do not owe healing to anyone), we must move away from moralistic perspectives and embrace a more expansive approach. This involves recognizing the unique experiences and challenges faced by individuals, considering socioeconomic factors that contribute to health inequality, and advocating for a healthcare system that benefits all communities.
Conclusion:
While eating disorder recovery evangelists may have good intentions, their approach to supporting individuals on their journey to healing often falls short. By adopting a moralistic lens, focusing solely on active recovery, neglecting socioeconomic factors, and ignoring the flaws of a profit-driven healthcare system, they inadvertently perpetuate stigma, hinder progress, and fail to provide the comprehensive and compassionate support needed. It is crucial to shift towards an approach that recognizes the complexities of eating disorders and addresses the systemic barriers that individuals face. By doing so, we can foster a more supportive, understanding, and effective environment for people living with eating disorders.
