Mental health matters

Mental health has received a considerable amount of attention over the past couple years for the wrong reason, tragedy.

It began with the Tucson event, then Aurora, followed by Sandy Hook, and now Santa Monica.

Or did it begin with Virginia Tech or Columbine? Ever notice we refer to these events by the cities, towns or schools?

We know the names but we dare not speak them. The consensus is, at least beginning with Virginia Tech, that all of these young men suffered from mental health problems. We know that Seung-Hui Cho was treated for such problems. We know that Jared Loughner’s parents were aware that their son was changing. We know that James Holmes was receiving psychiatric care. We know that Adam Lanza had been diagnosed with a disorder. And now we know that John Zawahri was also struggling with his mental health.

So, what does all of this mean? The discussion about these men usually ends up in 1 of 3 categories.

1) The gun debate
2) The Mental Health System
3) The gun debate

The 1st and 3rd categories often receive the most publicity, with the second coming in a distant 3rd. Recent articles have discussed the importance of separating the two issues, we are in agreement.

As long as mental health remains at the center of the gun debate, the issues we care about most (prevention, treatment and community) will continue to get lost in political agendas, lobbying efforts, and further scapegoating of the mentally ill. The image of mental illness will continue to be that of the most extreme, the most violent, and the most misunderstood. Efforts to increase awareness, silence stigma and engage the community will continue to be overshadowed by sound bites and images of terror.

Recent studies indicate that 25 percent of the population will have a mental health disorder. The term disorder seems a bit dramatic.

What this means, is that at some point, one in four of us will have difficulty so severe that it limits our ability to function as we usually would. A great example is grief.

There is a pretty universal understanding of grief; however, the loss of a loved one affects us all in profoundly different ways.

Grief itself is not a mental health disorder, but the inability to cope with grief can result in one. If a person’s grief becomes so overwhelming that they are unable to function or the inability to cope with grief begins manifesting in symptoms of depression, it’s official-disorder. But this is not the image of mental health/illness. As soon as somebody mentions mental illness, images of Laughner, Holmes and other extreme cases and violent events come to mind. This is not helpful, at least not for individuals outside of the gun debate.

So, if one in four us has/have/will have a mental health disorder, how likely is it that one in four of us will become violent and commit mass murder?

Not likely, so why not change the discussion?

Health is health, regardless of how and where it manifests. This One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest mindset has got to go. It is time to stop exploiting mental health for political gain and lobbying efforts and focus on accepting mental illness as a part of life.