The recent stimulating debate series in CAMH has highlighted how efforts to raise mental health awareness have resulted in a paradox: overpathologisation is a concern, and yet timely recognition and access to evidence-based support remain insufficient. Often those who need help most are least likely to access it. In response, I extend on the solutions offered by Gega et al. I contend that especially where supports and interventions are intended for use at early help stage, we should reconsider the use of diagnostic framing. Rather than describing interventions using diagnostic terms like depression and anxiety, we should use normalising language to describe these supports. To illustrate, I offer an example of a suite of self-guided single-session interventions (SSIs), not framed in diagnostic language but instead developed to be normalising. This reduces potential harm from requiring individuals to identify with a specific diagnostic construct to see such interventions as relevant to and suitable for them.