 The effect of diagnoses on those so distinguished has been demonstrated to be extensive, often personally transformative, and rarely consistently benign. The extent of these effects has drawn research attention to first-person report, and to the eloquent madness memoirs increasingly available for study. It has led to theorizing within formal philosophical writing, and also within the rhetoric of social movements and identity-focused political interest groups (see  §10).  The Recovery movement, for example, stresses the way the self and identity are diminished by diagnosis, eroding and occluding other, more positive, attributes making up the whole person. (See Jacobson &amp; Greenley 2001; Pouncey &amp; Lukens 2010; Davidson 2013.) Critiques of diagnosis place emphasis on its dehumanizing and “objectifying” effects that, multiplied by stigmatizing societal attitudes about psychiatric labels, engender self-stigma (Sadler 2005; Hoffman &amp; Hansen 2017;  Weiss, Ramakrishna, &amp; Somma 2006; Hinshaw 2009; Thornicroft 2006; Kendler &amp; Zachar 2015).