Mental Health

Doodledog I think you’ve put your finger on a problem that isn’t really that new - ie, to what extent should people’s difficulties be accommodated, and how much should resilience be encouraged.
Years ago, there was a columnist in the business section of the DT called Alison Eadie. Her column was aimed at small business owners. One particularly resonated with me - it was about how employees who had problems which impacted on their performance should be managed. Obviously the employer had to show sympathy and be accommodating, but the bottom line was often that other employees had to pick up the slack and ‘carry’ the underperforming one. There would come a point where sympathy would run out, and resentment of the underperforming employee would surface, with a knock on effect on the whole business.
I’m not sure if this is quite the scenario you were referring to, but it perhaps has parallels.
For what it’s worth, my DC have told me they are going to have “pull yourself together” engraved on my headstone

It's a similar scenario, yes. My point goes a bit further, I suppose, as we seem to be encouraging people to use MH issues as an excuse - from children going out during lockdown, through students to people at work.

It's tricky, as clearly people shouldn't be coerced into doing things that will make them mentally ill - but I think the term has become a catch-all for any sort of stress or discomfort, which detracts from the reality of living with something like depression or anxiety, and pulls 'real' MH issues under the same umbrella.

I also think that one of the reasons that some jobs pay more than others is because they can be stressful, and it is not fair for someone to take the salary if they are not able to cope with that - particularly if they are going to spend months at time off sick.

Doodledog I am in total agreement with you. I posted something very similar on GN a few weeks ago and was pilloried for it.

Gosh I don't know how to address this as well as I want to. I will try...

A: The human body is a complex thing, a delicate balance of hormones and chemicals. For instance, trauma in childhood can permanently change the growing brain leaving areas of the brain over and underdeveloped. This is a scientific fact. Not all mental health issues have 100% known causes but are hugely debilitating. Each ranges on a scale and some people become extremely good at hiding it.

B: Mental health manifests physically. This can range from panic attacks to severe digestive issues, chronic pain and more that's not on the top of my head. Not to mention suicide or harm to others as a possible outcome. Mental health is not solely a mental issue. Your body is keeping score and throwing out those chemical and hormonal balances.

C: The worst thing that has happened to someone is their 10. It may not compare to someone else's experience but it's comparible in terms of outcome. Especially if that person has not grown into a resilient adult.

D. You cannot ever know what someone else has been through. They may tell you they had a bad day because of xyz but you cannot know that's the real problem. All those awful things that happen in this world... Well I was a victim of emotional, sexual and physical abuse all during childhood. 99% of people who know me, as not my username, do not know this about me and would probably not understand that I may struggle at times for no reason they can see.

Basically, mental health is just as important as physical health, mental health often IS physical health.

When we learn this as a society we will start to truly be kind and empathetic and we will bring up future generations who feel safe to get help to fix their mental health and find real happiness rather than live in pain or pass on problems to others.

I don't have an issue with some people needing more support than others. That's just life. Some have dealt with more in the past than others. Some have difficult times to come.

I had a LOT of support from an employer when I had cancer and ongoing treatment for 4 years. It was a testament to the quality of my manager and head teacher that they never made me feel under pressure or stressed about how much time off I had, on full pay. As a result, when I had a hysterectomy, I felt well enough to go back to work after 4 weeks, knowing they would support me in being able to cope.

One thing that does irritate me though is the constant airing of 'trauma' socially. Not talking with close friends or family, that is how it should be but the ongoing public discussion of issues, concerns, trauma, problems. I KNOW I'm harsh, but unless I'm emotionally close to you, I don't want to know. I'm not saying people should be ashamed or embarrassed, but please. There is a time and a place. I don't want to hear the details of the depression of an acquaintance anymore than I want to hear the fine details of their gastric bypass.

I do think mental health is a term that seems to be thrown about a bit, but then 1 in 4 people will experience issues, so maybe it's time to come out of our closets and air our problems.

There are times when everybody feels stressed but being stressed does not necessarily mean you have mental health problems. Unfortunately some are using the very broad term mental health issues as it seems to be very trendy currently. For example, many celebrities claim they are suffering from mental health problems. Is it genuine or just a way of gaining more publicity? Sadly all of this does not help people who genuinely have serious mental illness and who need support. Not going to work because you are a bit stressed or feeling a bit low does not begin to compare to people who suffer with severe depression and it’s consequences.

Starblaze thanks for your post, and your honesty.

I agree with you that MH is important, and also understand that it is linked to physical health. That is not really my point, though (I'll come back to this).

I also accept that neither I, nor anyone else, can know what someone else has been through, and that people have different 'thresholds', for want of a better term.

My point, though, is that in some cases people appear to 'opt out' of doing difficult things, and expect others to not only do their own share of these things, but to do theirs for them, and at the same time take the salary that is attached to having a 'difficult' job. This is the bit that I find unfair. If someone knows that they struggle with (as an example) public speaking, why take a job as a lecturer? There are plenty of roles that utilise other skills, and never require the holder to speak to a room full of people. By taking these roles, those who find them stressful are simply passing on the stress to others, which is, IMO, wrong. If a problem with public speaking develops whilst someone is in the role, then I think they should be counselled and helped however possible to overcome the issue, in the hope that there is no need to have to leave. Similarly, if some students don't have to give a viva because they are stressful, what about those who do give them and get a lower mark?

I suppose I see it in the same way as the fact that someone who is blind cannot be a bus driver, and if they develop blindness whilst in that role they would be expected to leave and be redeployed. It's not a good situation, but I suspect that few would argue with it.

I absolutely want to live in a caring society, but that has to work both ways, and people having to carry the can for those in jobs they can't do is not being caring to them.

This was not my only point, though. I was also (maybe clumsily) exploring the idea that letting people use MH as a 'get-out' (and I don't mean this disrespectfully at all), the issue of mental illness is trivialised, as more people will see what seem like excuses than they will, say, CPTSD, which, as you say, is often disguised.

growstuff, I didn't see your thread (or have forgotten it), but I understand that it is a difficult subject to discuss, as people can jump to the conclusion that anyone saying what I am saying is unsympathetic or lacking understanding, and I honestly am neither. I am just interested to hear what others think.

ETA, sorry - cross posted with a few people. I'm not ignoring you {smile]

Strangely, lockdown has suited my mental health well. I'm no stranger to chronic and acute depression and anxiety, the exact details of which I choose not to discuss with most people. Above all, I hate sympathy.

What I've realised from reading about other people's mental health issues is how resilient I actually am. Maybe that's because I live with the losses some people mention every day of my life and have found ways of dealing with them.

I agree with you Doodledog. I find myself thinking "for goodness sake, get a grip" far more often than I would have thought possible. On the other hand, I think some people experience real suffering which is lost amongst all the claims of mental health issues. I know that sounds harsh and uncaring, but I really do care about those who are really suffering.

Whenever I feel a bit low, this song makes me feel more positive (ironically):

www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiWomXklfv8

Gagajo Yes, if someone has an issue (physical or mental) the is likely to get better, then I absolutely agree that there should as much support as possible to help them to cope with it and that colleagues can be expected to rally round. That is different from someone having an ongoing problem that lasts for years, and means that they have 6 month spells off work every couple of years, plus shorter absences when there are stressful events or busy periods at work.

MissAdventure and Gwyneth, Yes! That is what I am getting at. It may be semantics, but the more 'Mental Health' is used to describe a step or two outside of someone's comfort zone, the less it will be understood, to the detriment of those with devastating MH issues.

I think perhaps we have forgotten that it's ok to feel sad, angry, hopeless, lonely at times.
It's normal. (Well, I used to think it was?)

One thing that does irritate me though is the constant airing of 'trauma' socially. Not talking with close friends or family, that is how it should be but the ongoing public discussion of issues, concerns, trauma, problems. I KNOW I'm harsh, but unless I'm emotionally close to you, I don't want to know.

I don't think you're harsh at all GagaJo; to a large extent I agree with what you say. I don't understand what is gained by public disclosure of "concerns, trauma and problems" either or how the repetitive airing of them brings any solace or healing.
I've worked with someone for over 3 years who "suffers with anxiety" which broadly seems to mean that if there's a job to be done that she doesn't like the look of, she has an "anxiety attack" and disappears for a week. The impact on the rest of the team, both physically and the resentment it causes, is immense. Sympathy and empathy evaporated a long time ago, leaving anger and resentment amongst the rest of the team. Which isn't good for their mental health either.

There used to be a bit of a stigma attached to the idea of having any reference to depression or other mental health issues noted down on your work record.

Actually, I have a whole playlist of songs which cheer me up. None of them is a happy song. They're all meaningful and, sin some ways, melancholic. Maybe they focus my mind on what is positive about my life. I sometimes think that the emphasis on "being the best" and "having the best" is harmful. People are who they are and are happiest if they accept that, sometimes being able to find realistic solutions to issues. I hate the idea of offering people unreal "unicorns".

MissAdventure

There used to be a bit of a stigma attached to the idea of having any reference to depression or other mental health issues noted down on your work record.

There still is.

MissAdventure

I think perhaps we have forgotten that it's ok to feel sad, angry, hopeless, lonely at times.
It's normal. (Well, I used to think it was?)

Yes, it is OK and quite normal. I think the fact that it's normal is why people who are experiencing those emotions aren't really that special.

There are even exceptions to that though, Doodledog. I used to have a colleague who had lost a child in very traumatic (as if the death of a child can be anything else!) circumstances. Every year at the anniversary, she would sink into an awful pit and it would take her varying amounts of time to climb out.

Fortunately, she was working at the place that supported me through cancer and they were unfailingly understanding, as I think they should have been. Some years were worse for her than others.

Do you think so growstuff? My colleague was quite open about her mental health history when she applied for the job and obviously the decision to hire her was agreed by management. But I don't know whether anyone quite envisaged what the repercussions in the workplace would have on the department she was in, and the people who would have to accommodate her frequent absences. Management are aware of the situation but seem unable to do anything about it now.

I worked for a charity which very much welcomed people with diverse health issues to apply for jobs.

Hence we had support workers who bought along their own support workers to the job.

Chewbacca

Do you think so growstuff? My colleague was quite open about her mental health history when she applied for the job and obviously the decision to hire her was agreed by management. But I don't know whether anyone quite envisaged what the repercussions in the workplace would have on the department she was in, and the people who would have to accommodate her frequent absences. Management are aware of the situation but seem unable to do anything about it now.

Maybe teaching is different. There's a legal requirement for teachers to be physically and mentally healthy (can't remember the exact wording). There is most definitely a stigma.

Chewbacca Management can do very little if they were aware of issues when the colleague was appointed. It's management's responsibility to make adjustments.

That's awful, Gagajo. I know it might seem like splitting hairs, but IMO that is not the sort of thing I am talking about though. What you describe is something that can be predicted (I assume?) planned for and is, as much as these things can be, relatively self-limiting. It's not about someone choosing not to do certain tasks, or being employed to do something of which they are not capable.

Anyway, there will always be examples of people and situations that fall outside of policies, and they tend to be the ones who get hurt when attitudes harden and more hard-line policies are brought in to protect against others who are seen to be misusing the system.

GagaJo

There are even exceptions to that though, Doodledog. I used to have a colleague who had lost a child in very traumatic (as if the death of a child can be anything else!) circumstances. Every year at the anniversary, she would sink into an awful pit and it would take her varying amounts of time to climb out.

Fortunately, she was working at the place that supported me through cancer and they were unfailingly understanding, as I think they should have been. Some years were worse for her than others.

That's good management and there was no question that she was somehow "milking" a situation. I expect she wanted to climb out of it as much as management wanted her to be well.