@Rethink_ It's a drum I've banged often, but it's still pertinent
Mental health 'awareness' is an important first step, but it's not an end point. And for too many, being aware of/acknowledging mental health issues is taken to mean the problem's dealt with
Being part of an online community where everyone is open and honest about their #MentalHealth is great. Often essential. But that doesn't mean everyone enjoys a similar situation. Indeed, the majority seemingly don't.
/3
@Rethink_ In many ways, the discussion around #MentalHealth mirrors the one around the climate crisis
"So, we agree that the problem is real and very serious, yes?"
"Yup"
"So, shall we to try to... fix it?"
"Woah! That'll be expensive and disruptive! I'm sure it'll work out OK"
/4
@Rethink_ Don't get me wrong; getting to a point where the majority seem, at least on the surface, to accept that #mentalhealth problems are real and should be taken seriously, that's good. And shows impressive progress, even within recent memory.
/5
@Rethink_ For example, it was well within the last two decades that we regularly saw mainstream articles describing those with depression as 'attention seeking', that all they needed was fresh air/exercise etc.
You *still* get this, but it's more of a fringe view than it once was
/6
@Rethink_ But, back to the original point, it's still bleakly common to see people who clearly think that acknowledging mental health problems is the same as 'fixing' them. And this ignores the true scope of the problem, and the considerable efforts needed to really fix them
/7
@Rethink_ Seems churlish to object to things that are, presumably, well intended, but "The road to hell" etc.
Basically, this casual "it's all fine" approach to #mentalhealth can, and regularly does, have very negative consequences, even if they're subtle ones.
/8
@Rethink_ One obvious issue with assuming that everyone's "aware" of mental health problems, and therefore no more needs to be done, is that... nothing gets done? Existing problems carry on existing, and maybe get worse because people assume they're sorted out now.
/9
@Rethink_ I mean, thinking that we've 'moved beyond' mental health stigma is a problem when... we haven't?
As @Rethink_'s research suggests, *most* people experiencing mental health issues are still deeply affected by stigma. Pretending they aren't won't help
@Rethink_ Another factor I've flagged up repeatedly:
Assuming that 'everyone' is aware of #mentalhealth and it's 'not an issue' often leads to making often leads to things that make life HARDER for dealing with problems with their own.
/11
@Rethink_ My own personal bugbear here is the 'Toxic Positivity' phenomenon
The idea that you can 'choose' to be happy, to have good wellbeing? It's a short leap from there to blaming people for their own #mentalhealth problems. Because they chose 'wrongly'
/12
Technically, these things do reduce anxiety, *to an extent*
But packaging them like this, and not differentiating between everyday and *clinical* anxiety? It's like saying "Covered in enraged wasps? Try some camomile tea, and avoid wasps in future"
Yeah, cheers for that
/13
'Take smarphone breaks' or 'get fresh air' in response to national #MentalHealth problems? It's like the old "Climate crisis? That's on you guys. Use paper straws, and eat more lentils" tactic
i.e. affected individuals with limited power are expected to solely deal with it
/14
And then there's the whole "We ALL have mental health issues, we ALL need self-care" etc. attitude.
I don't want to say that it's basically a #mentalhealth equivalent of "Well, *I* don't see colour..."
But I am going to say that. Because I think it often is the case.
/15
Then there's the way that increased #MentalHealth awareness, for all the good it can and does do, has also meant that aspects of it have been co-opted and exploited for more nefarious ends. Again, whether intended or not.
/16
For instance, people will now regularly say they are 'a little bit OCD' because they're somewhat fastidious.
You're not. You don't have 'a bit' of a serious compulsive disorder. You're just fussy.
/17
Also, the increased awareness of #mentalhealth awareness and assessment means you get a lot more 'armchair' diagnosis now. By people who are utterly unqualified to diagnose, and wouldn't have the necessary info to do so even if they were
Armchair diagnosis is a real worry for me. It means people end up attributing any negative quality about a person to an underlying #MentalHealth issue. And if any and every bad aspect of people is linked to mental health problems, do you THINK that may be a tad stigmatising?
/19
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
For the record, I don't (as far as I or anyone else knows) have ADHD
But I have many individuals, who I value greatly and/or who are very close to me, who have recently been diagnosed ADHD, and you'd better believe I'll go to the bat for them in any context
/2
Some may jump on this as a way to discredit me, to dismiss my critique of the #Panorama#ADHD investigation. Because I should, after all, be totally impartial, not influenced by defending people I care about?
How did you get access to a 'Leading NHS consultant', mate? The vast majority of people dealing with (potential ADHD) have to wait years for such a thing. Surely you didn't just jump the queue by flashing your BBC credentials?
/1
Also, minor point perhaps, but if the OPENING PARAGRAPH of your prominent piece for the highly respected national broadcaster is already promoting, by accident or design, an 'Online mental health assessments aren't valid' view, that's potentially MASSIVELY damaging
Was recently asked which scientific 'myth' I'd like to see banished forever
Obviously, given my field and output, I had to choose 'we only use 10% of our brains'
A common moan, sure. But it's not just a silly thing that leads to shoddy movie plots. It's worse than that
/1
For one thing, the origins of the 'we only use 10% of our brain' notion are unclear. But analysis suggests it came about *at least* a century ago. Believe it or not, our understanding of the brain has improved by orders of magnitude since then
/2
And that's assuming that the 10% of the brain myth stems from valid contemporary 19th/early 20th century science. But there's no conclusive evidence for this. At best it arose via word-of-mouth distortions or misunderstandings of scientific findings at the time
/2
This is so wrong that it actually violates the laws of spacetime, loops back on itself, and ends up being 100% wrong, repeatedly, in multiple ways, all at the same time
This Goodwin berk getting SO MUCH AIRTIME is a legitimate disgrace by the UK media
Imagine if the big papers handed all their premier league coverage over to a part time Grimsby town goalkeeper, still bitter about his failed trial at QPR
This is the academic equivalent of that
Seriously, I bet I could be a millionaire within months if I wanted. Cherry pick some studies that I could spin as 'proving' that women/immigrants/homosexuals etc are 'neurologically inferior', use my profile to put my 'discoveries' out there, and ride the hate-filled gravy train
Thursday: "The Johnson family suffered during lockdown, broke the rules they enforced on the rest of us, and we should all feel sorry for them"
Monday: Boris Johnson nominates father Stanley for Knighthood, for services to domestic abuse, or something
It's. So. Enraging!
Reminder:
Literal millions of us lost loved ones during the pandemic. Many may have been spared if PM Johnson had made better decisions
We all obeyed the rules (with harsh penalties) Johnson imposed, painful as they were. Because it was the law, and others could have died
/2
And what did our trauma and sacrifice get from the media and powers-that-be? Usually, a brief new digit on the rolling death toll, and regular reminders that our experiences ranked lower than people's desire to go back to the pub
/3
There's actually a lot of weird neuroscience/psychology that leads to this persistent phenomenon of 'aggressively defending the wealthy and powerful', including
- The Just World Hypothesis
- Parasocial relationships
- Social identification
Firstly, what's the 'Just World' hypothesis? It's the cognitive bias where we tend to assume the world is fair and 'just'. That good actions are rewarded, and bad actions are punished. Perceived (un)fairness is something humans are 'wired' to react to
Despite being, you know, wrong, the Just World hypothesis makes evolutionary sense. If we felt the results of our actions/decisions were random, we'd not be motivated to do anything good. We're a cooperative species by nature, so that'd be unehlpful