In one sense, in my view, it's all about judgment and taste. Who would want to
reveal anything to anyone who says "Well, he's got somethin' wrong wif his haid" ?

Or who would want to reveal anything to a doctor of psychology who writes in to
request responses to "how does the stigma of bipolar illness affect you"? He's
a doctor of pyschology, mind you, and attempting to draw very sensitive people into conversation about very sensitive issues.

In both instances, the two people lack judgment and taste IMHO.

In the first instance, the person lacks intelligence enough to handle the information in an educated and knowledgeable way.

In the second instance, the doctor of psychology is insensitive but likely very well-informed regarding bipolar illness. His judgment is a bit skewed, IMHO.

The answer, seems to me, to be that we must use our best judgment about discussing this with lay persons or with anyone who reveals to us an uninformed attitude or insensitivity to and about mental illnesses.

If it's of value to you to know this, I might add that Dr. Kay Jamison Redfield, who is herself Bipolar and a psychiatrist (Head of her department, I think), writer of at least two books ,"An Unquiet Mind" and "Touched With Fire", was told by her co-doctors, "just be sure you take your medications". That's what you call an enlightened response to having bipolar illness.

I've heard people say that the stigma exists in their community--which they label
as 100 years behind its time; others in California will tell you that it is alive and
thriving in their community --if you can call that "alive and thriving".

Just be careful about whom you discuss your most intimate natural endowments with in this age--until, at least, we get better enlightenment among the uneducated.