Robin
Williams, Mental Health, and Social Insanity
by
MICHAEL K. SMITH
“We
are made miserable . . . not just by the strength of our beliefs, but
by the weight of hard and all-too real situations, as they bear
downward, robbing us of control . . . unhappiness treated by
clinicians has much more to do with the sufferer’s situation than
with anything about themselves, and for those with few privileges,
this unhappiness is pretty well beyond the reach of therapeutic or
any other conversation.”
– Paul
Moloney “The Therapy Industry”
Robin Williams’s body was scarcely cold when liberal commentators began using the tragedy of his death as publicity for suicide hotlines and professional mental health intervention in general. He had long-standing depression, we were told, and his “mental illness” was manifest in his decision to take his own life. Depression sufferers were urged to “be honest” and avail themselves of the services of professional therapists and counselors.
Days
later Williams’s widow informed the world that her husband had been
been diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease, a degenerative disorder
that even people with no prior history of depression can find
impossible to face. Parkinson’s is chronic, and its symptoms
worsen over time, leading to body tremors, muscle stiffness, and the
loss of coordinated movement. No one knows why the disease
develops, and it is incurable.
We
do not know what went through Williams’s mind, of course, but it is
not difficult to entertain the idea that the lifelong actor made an
understandable decision to take an early exit from life’s stage
rather than suffer the appalling loss of body control that the
disease entails for its sufferers. Surely there is something
more than “mental illness” involved in the desire to avoid such a
fate.
Even
if Williams’s well-known depression, which long-predated his
Parkinson’s diagnosis, was involved in his decision to end his
life, the liberal notion that we can and ought to rely on mental
health professionals to guide us to health and sanity is more than a
little suspect. There is no evidence that this group suffers
lower rates of depression than the rest of the population, nor any
that any kind of therapy has a cure for it. In fact, the
evidence suggests that the mental health profession plays a crucial
role in perpetuating a status quo within which depression is said to
be growing by leaps and bounds.
Psychoanalyst
Joel Kovel demonstrated in the early 1980s that psychotherapy and
counseling had become indispensable parts of the capitalist economy,
especially in the United States, where turning socially induced
misery into false questions of self-improvement long ago reached the
status of a quasi-religious movement. Subsequent to Kovel’s
published insights came the “diseasing” and drugging of
hyper-active American schoolchildren due to what eventually came to
be known as “ADHD.” In more recent years, we have seen how
“happiness psychology,” particularly the work of conservative
academic and writer Martin Seligman, a former chairman of the
American Psychological Association and adviser to the U.S. military,
informed the Bush Administration’s torture program at Guantanamo
Bay. All of this should make us quite skeptical about claims
that therapy and counseling have the answer to our mental woes.
Having
said that, the challenge of effectively treating mental disorders is
surely formidable. According to surveys and clinical data,
rates of depression in the U.S. have increased ten-fold since the
1950s, although it must be admitted that individuals of quite
divergent symptoms are routinely classified under this broad
umbrella, calling into question the validity of the category itself.
However, even if some of the increase is due to an increased
tendency to define common dissatisfaction as illness, it seems likely
that at least some of the increase is genuine, given soaring
inequality and an attendant increase in chronic illness, social
isolation and reported loneliness, and suicide, especially during the
periods of economic crisis that have become a nearly constant feature
of U.S. capitalism in recent years.
Contrary
to therapeutic claims that a “positive” attitude is the key to
mental health, a growing body of evidence supports the claim that the
principal influence on people’s mental health is their
circumstances, both past and present. We can now say with some
assurance that the larger and more obvious the gaps between rich and
poor in developed societies – and the more exploitive the relations
required to maintain and expand them – the greater the likelihood
of violent conflict, mutual distrust, and degraded health, both
mental and physical. Features of a particular location in the
social hierarchy such as prestige, conditions of work, material
circumstances, and wealth largely determine one’s likelihood of
enjoying mental and physical health or illness. And to the
extent that one belongs to a stigmatized, exploited group, and
especially if one is poor, the more likely one is to experience
life’s hardest blows – more often, more painfully, and with fewer
joyful experiences to compensate for them.
Conventional
counseling and therapy isn’t even focused on this problem, much
less is it offering a solution to it. Because of its conviction
that attitude is everything, conventional approaches put the onus of
responsibility on the poor for their poverty. Thus they are
given parenting training and other judgmental interventions when what
they really need is decent housing, food, recreation, medical care,
and above all, money. The assumption is that the poor deserve
to be poor owing to their allegedly deficient character, made
manifest in poor impulse control, hypersexuality, and a general lack
of integrity. If it weren’t for these defects, the theory
goes, the poor would be contented members of the middle class. This
is one of the most damaging features of therapy, because it teaches
exploited people that they are deficient or substandard instead of
abused. Unfortunately, the crude stereotypes blaming the
poor for their plight are promoted by a wide spectrum of members of
the so-called “helping” profession: community leaders,
social work educators, and quite a few academic researchers. If
this is “help,” what might hindrance be?
Therapists
and counselors with a genuine interest in finding a cure for mental
illness would do well to investigate the income inequalities
hypothesis of population health. Based on the common sense
assumption that high levels of inequality are unhealthy (directly for
the poor, indirectly for the rich), the thesis is that for modern
industrialized countries, the average health, well-being, and
longevity of the population depends not on the level of absolute
poverty that exists, but on the spread of wealth, and especially on
the gap between rich and poor.
As
income differentials widen, the theory goes, people start to feel
more competitive, and begin to look on others with increasing
suspicion and distrust. Wariness, envy, shame, fear, and anger
become more pronounced and take on a self-perpetuating thrust,
undermining the basis for affectionate and caring relationships. A
life of perpetual insecurity (which former Fed Chairman Alan
Greenspan declared in Congressional testimony was the principal
reason for the 1990s boom years) and perceived threat triggers the
release of cortisol and other “stress” hormones into the
bloodstream, lowering our capacity to fight infection and ward off
heart disease and other degenerative conditions. It
should be emphasized that the theory maintains that this harms even
the rich, who, amidst increasingly unjust conditions, have less and
less opportunity to enjoy their wealth in ease. The public
health implications are substantial: an increase of 7% in the
share of income going to the bottom half of the population allegedly
yields two additional years of life expectancy. [Note: The
U.S. has the most unequal distribution of wealth in the developed
world. According to the most recent survey by the Federal
Reserve, the top decile own 71% of the country's wealth, while the
bottom half claims just one percent.]
One
of the more intriguing mental health research findings undermines the
“positive attitude” theorists. It shows that moderately
depressed people have a more accurate perception of their abilities
and their capacity to control events than do “healthy” people. A
2002 study found that mildly depressed women were more likely to live
longer than non-depressed or severely depressed women. A
longitudinal study of more than 1000 California schoolchildren
concluded that optimism was more likely to lead to premature death –
possibly because the optimists took more risks. Another study
among pre-teenagers found that kids who were more realistic about
their standing among their peers were less likely to get depressed
than those who had illusions about their popularity. And a 2001
study co-authored by the guru of happiness psychology himself –
Martin Seligman – found that among older people pessimists were
less likely to fall into depression following a negative life event
such as the death of a family member than were optimists.
These
findings should provoke a complete reorientation of, not just the
helping professions, but the entire society. After all,
psychologists have long convinced us that we are all “CEOs” of
self, rationally testing our ideas against reality, and that we
become disturbed to the extent that we cannot accept the verdict that
reality delivers. In short, to the extent that our ideas are
unrealistic we are mentally ill, which should mean that President
Obama, the Supreme Court, top executives on Wall Street, and
virtually the entire Congress are certifiable lunatics.
But
of course it doesn’t mean that. WE who cannot make our peace with a
social order dedicated to plunder and destruction are mentally
suspect, because responsible adulthood entails setting aside the
childish notion that the world can be transformed into something
within which a decent person would want to live, in order to
concentrate on the supremely important matter of reproducing an
increasingly imperiled social order dedicated to getting and
spending. This is the reigning definition of sanity in our
times. God help anyone who insists that social and political
reality, not personal attitudes and reactions, is what needs to be
adjusted.
Michael
K. Smith
is the author of “The
Madness of King George,”
from Common Courage Press. He co-blogs with Frank Scott
at www.legalienate.blogspot.com
Sources
Barbara
Ehrenreich, “Bright-Sided
– How The Relentless Promotion of Positive Thinking Has Undermined
America,”
(Metropolitan Books, 2009)
Paul
Moloney, “The
Therapy Industry – The Irresistible Rise of the Talking Cure, and
Why It Doesn’t Work,”
(Pluto Press, 2013)
Robin Williams video goes global
Robin
Williams' final message of hope to terminally ill North Auckland
woman Vivian Waller has hit headlines across the world.
19
August, 2014
The
story about the 21-year-old receiving a short personal message from
the late actor has been featured on television and radio stations, as
well as headlines in the United States, UK, Germany, Scotland,
Argentina, Canada, France, Lebanon and the Netherlands.
The
New York Daily News featured Vivian and husband Jack on the front
page, along with interview requests coming from ABC News and
Entertainment Tonight.
The
Mirror, Huffington Post, The Telegraph, Vanity Fair, CBS and even US
celebrity Ryan Seacrest have featured the story in publications and
online.
Jack
says he is surprised at the reaction of so many. He and Viv are
trying to stay out of the spotlight.
''I
can only hope that it's a reminder to everyone how great Robin
Williams was.''
>
Share this story on Facebook.
The
couple's Facebook page is fielding comments from across the globe.
Lisa
Diem-Moore writes: ''Watched from Pennsylvania, USA, sending prayers
to you and your family!''
Kelly
Smoak says, ''I just saw the article on Buzzfeed. Thank you for
sharing this wonderful video of a man we all love so much. I will be
keeping up with your journey from South Carolina, USA. God bless.''
A
message from Julian Robert Dean in South Wales: ''Have read your
article and seen the lovely video from Robin Williams, sending you
and your family love and prayers from Ynyshir, The Rhondda Fach,
South Wales. Wishing you love and sending you hugs.''
Other
cancer fighters have also responded with messages of hope for Vivian.
Alex
James Meseck writes: ''Saw the video and loved. Sending best wishes
and prayers. As a childhood cancer survivor, I can understand how
you're feeling.
"As
I've met more and more people with cancer, I've come to learn that
terminal cancer can be beaten. Good luck and know you have many
people praying for you.''
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.