Historically, Fruedian model reduced mental illness to repressed sexual feeling of childhood and this formed basis for treatment of psychosis and neurosis . Despite lack of improvement in symptoms , these views were unchallenged or backed by research . This happened at a time when rest of medicine was progressing with discovery of antibiotics and cell theory .Medical colleagues considered psychiatry as inferior and lacking scientific basis, the argument which was further highlighted by antipsychiatry movement . Szaz argued that without an organic basis or brain pathology mental illness is a myth and that we are falsely labelling normal human sufferings . However , this concept of the speciality being a bunk was addressed when the DSM 3 under spitzer gave a structure and organisation to the mental illness and evoked more funding and research . But these classification were not culture sensitive. Western concepts of classification failed to capture the nuances of cultural groups in Australia . These were seen as fraud medicine especially by teh indegenous groups , who already had a fractured relationship with white society due to legacy of colonisation( King etal , 2009)Their understanding of mental health was intricate with spiritual , emotional and societal well being . RANZCP position statemnt 90 has asserted that cultural formulation , with the support of ATSI worker , as was seen in Whare Tapa Wha framework is important in improving acceptability and trust in mental illness and treatment . Ethically ,focussing on a biological model of neurotransmitter theory and over projecting teh benfits of psychotropics as a pill for all can be seen as a bunk by the patient . STAR -D real world antidepressant trial shows that response to antidepressant in level four after three failed antidepressants is only 37% which is in stark contrast to that projected by Pharma industry. On the other hand one also needs to be wary of the role played by social media in projecting or selectively reporting inpatient suicide and views of patient who had negative experiences without delving into the complexities involved in that particular case as a general picture of mental health and that teh clinicinas are fraud . RANZCP asserts our role in advocating for sensible reporting and limit setting with the media like gold water rule - not giving opinion on a case for whom one didnoy have direct clinical responsibility . On the other hand , beneficient to the patient is an establishing a robust therapeutic relationship and sharing information based on existing evidences and supporting them to take a decision thereby the accusation of fancy lingo accusation is addressed . RANZCP code of ethics states that we should share information to teh patient in a simple language and using aids or interpreters when this is a barrier . A biopsychosocial explanation may be more relevant to the patient , although this may be compared to the knowledge provided by Shamans centuries ago , but is based on scientific research , incorporated patient values and clinical judgement . Recovery model forms an optimal balance were personal recovery based on hope and identity ( Barber et al 2012 ) is given same importance as illness management . As this approach is essentially patient led , these are less prone to accusations of paternalistic interventions. However , recovery may be delayed by economic and geographic constraints which patient may attribute the delay and mistrust the clinician as doing parrot talk . In my clinical experience , a patient with intellectual disability and schizophrenia on Mental health act had to wait for 8 month inpatient ward to get a suitable supported independent living . We have a role to advocate for our patients and for social determinants of health ( Berwick etal , JAMA 2020) like policies for ending descrimnation , social needs and infrastructure of vulnerable population . In conclusion ,misconception hs been perpetuated by lack of evidence based practices historically ,culturally insensitive care and unrealsitic expectations from a biological model of illness. The systemic issues and social media scare mongering can create an added layer of complexity in the distrust towards the system. This has been balanced by a bio psycho social approach , evidence based medicine and cultural formulations. Our roles as advocates in propagating awareness and challenging false views is also imperative. Moving forward , a patient centric approach and shared decision making based on evidence based practices will help in improving credibility and acceptability of psychiatry.