The editorial by Kendell (Reference Kendell2001) independently reflects the view of Baker & Menken (Reference Baker and Menken2001) that it is time to abandon the term ‘mental illness’. All three authors emphasise that an important reason for so doing is that the term is stigmatising and undermining of the care and treatment of millions of psychiatric (Kendell) and neurological patients (Baker & Menken). Interestingly, Kendell suggests that the term ‘psychiatric illness’ is more acceptable, whereas Baker & Menken propose instead ‘brain illness’. The former seems to replace the mind by the psyche and the latter by the brain.

Like Kendell, I have reviewed the historical processes that have led to the evolution and divergence of psychiatry and neurology as separate disciplines with all the ensuing confusing theoretical and practical uncertainties and complications for professionals and patients alike, including stigma (Reference ReynoldsReynolds, 1990). Modern neuroscience, which has demonstrated how brain function is profoundly influenced by psychological and social as well as biological factors, has opened the way for resolving some of these uncertainties and divisions. I share the view that one way forward is to build practical bridges between neurology and psychiatry (Reference Reynolds and TrimbleReynolds & Trimble, 1989). For example, it does not make sense for neurologists and psychiatrists quite separately to tackle the problem of stigma towards brain and mental illnesses without some dialogue or coordination, especially as neurologists sometimes blame the stigma of brain disease on misunderstandings created by inappropriate application of the term ‘mental’.

I do not, however, share the possibly unrealistic and impractical view that the term ‘mental illness’ should be abandoned. Brain/mind issues have been debated by professionals, philosophers, patients and the public for centuries, and this will continue for some time to come. It is reminiscent of proposals to abolish the word ‘epilepsy’ because this neurological condition is so stigmatised. Similar suggestions have been made in the past for the words ‘cancer’ and ‘leprosy’, which together with ‘epilepsy’ were three great unmentionables for much of the 20th century (Reference ReynoldsReynolds, 2000).

Stigma results from ignorance, misunderstanding, fear and prejudice, and the way to combat it is by education and raising public awareness. Rather than abandon the word ‘epilepsy’ the International League Against Epilepsy (professional), the International Bureau for Epilepsy (patients/public) and the World Health Organization (political) have jointly initiated a global campaign to bring epilepsy ‘out of the shadows’ (Reference ReynoldsReynolds, 2000).