Forums

Reading "The Yellow Wallpaper" by Charlotte Perkins Gilman has raised some serious concerns in my mind about mental illness and the comparison between how it was percieved in the past and how it is interpreted in our present day society. There is no doubt that the main character (who coincidently is unnamed) suffers from a serious mental ailment that ultimately prevents her form becoming a functioning member of society. She is locked away in her room and prescribed by her husband as well as her (male) doctor the "resting cure", which mainly consists of refraining from any or all functions that could potentially cause stress. These functions can even include every day mandatory activities, such as going to the washroom and cooking food for yourself. She is living a life of complete immobilization with little to no hope of overcoming the disease that keeps her immobile. In a sense, she is being oppressed by not only her mental disease, but also by those around her who feed her with a falsified idea of how to live with a mental illness. This prominent theme in the story forced me to ask myself whether current perceptions of mental illness have changed from past perceptions of it, and for the most part I would say that these interpretations have changed for the better. Institutions have been put into place that prescribe those suffering with mental ailments treatments other than the archaic "resting cure" that, at the time and after the fact, was proven to be insufficient in curing mental illness. On top of this, institutions have decided to broaden their definition of mental illness beyond the most common occurrences of depression, such as schizophrenia, post traumatic stress disorder, and many others. Despite these major steps forward, mental illness is still stigmatized and factors that have been proven to bring forth symptoms of depression and mental illness still exist in our society. Why do you think this is?

I came across an article in Atlantic Magazine (written by health journalist Alice G. Walton, PhD) entitled "Why More Americans Suffer From Mental Disorders Than Anyone Else" that addresses the problem of mental illness in America. Backed by the World Health Organization, the article claims that over a year, "27 percent of adults in the U.S will experience some sort of mental health disorder", which is a fairly high occurrence considering the entire population of America. Another part of the article that really intrigued me (and at the same time, angered me) addresses mental illness as a "luxury disorder". Is it strange that I'm a little offended by this claim? According to the article, the number of people suffering with depression in third world countries such as those in Africa is very low. This is because the main focus of those residing in Africa is simply trying to survive, and that Africans basically don't have time to be depressed. But apparently, many Americans who are living comfortably have time to be depressed, because they don't need to worry about whether they will survive to see tomorrow. I can understand that the pressures of achieving the "American Dream" can be overwhelming and therefore can lead to instances of depression and mental illness, but to label depression as a "luxury disorder" seems a little unfair in my opinion. This is the very perception of mental illness that makes those who suffer afraid to come forward and talk about their disease. It is as if Americans have nothing better to do than to be depressed, and as if being depressed in America means that you are living a comfortable life, which would then mean that there wouldn't be anything to be depressed about. Confusing? Absolutely. Labelling mental illness as a luxury means that we are labelling those who suffer with mental illness. America is taking one step forward and two steps back when it comes to this issue.

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2011/10/why-more-americans-suffer-from-mental-disorders-than-anyone-else/246035/#slide4

The way we approach the topic of mental illness has definitely changed; however, not necessarily for the better (at least not on all areas). We've become more open to talking about it, but there is still a lot of judgement attached. Help centres are more accessible and campaigns for this cause reach the global public, yet many choose to seek help anonymously (web counseling, forums) instead of turning to their friends and family first.
The understanding of those who suffer from a mental illness is by far optimistic. There is still a division between adults and teenagers. A lot more attention is given to treatment of people over 25 and dealing with mental illness after that age is considered "normal", meaning that adults have more to worry about. Teenage MI is too many a times regarded as just "raging hormones" that will sort out eventually. What many cease to understand is that mental illness does not discriminate.
A lot of support is given to natural treatments. While therapy, exercise, meditation are a good way of coping, they are not always successful. Antidepressants are something people try to avoid out of shame and not because they are unconvinced the medication will help. I've met a few people who have felt judged for even thinking about taking medication, because those who haven't suffered from a mental illness don't seem understand that it is not like a bad cold that gets better with some tea, honey and positive thinking. A quote from Kristen Bell comes to my mind while writing this: "In the medical community, you would never deny a diabetic his insulin. But for some reason, when someone needs a serotonin inhibitor, they’re immediately crazy or something."
We have to know that people suffering from mental illness do their best to help themselves and supporting only those who seek natural treatment is taking a step back in progress made towards understanding those affected.