In response to Paul Routledge’s Daily Mirror column and the comment that
young people need to consider the ‘madness of making each other mentally ill’.
It was perhaps the title of the news column which struck me
in its language ‘Anti-social media is
causing our young children to turn anorexic’. I instinctively questioned
what was meant by ‘anti-social media’ and how the phrase ‘turn anorexic’ seemed
almost flippant. After all, would it be acceptable to describe someone as ‘turning
cancerous’ or ‘turning diabetic’ – it just doesn’t seem appropriate and implies
an element of choice.
The article I am
discussing was part of Paul Routledge’s column in the popular newspaper The
Mirror last Friday (which can be accessed here - http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/anti-social-media-causing-young-children-5365897)
. It did open by bringing awareness to
an issue which does need to be addressed – that ‘primary school children as
young as seven are seeking help for self-harm, suicidal thoughts and
psychological problems.’ After all, the
mental health of younger children has
been oft-neglected, potentially highlighted by the scrabbling ‘pledge’ of David Cameron’s government to increase mental
health service spending, with a focus on children, by £1.25 billion. Yet many
would say too little, too late. After all, Routledge cites the statics that ‘The
number of kids under 12 hospitalised for anorexia has almost doubled over the
last decade to 119 in the past year’. Yet,
interestingly, these are statistics from a writer who opens the column with
‘Boring things, statistics’.
There are many adjectives to describe the rise in documented
child mental health problems, but ‘boring’, is not one of them.
Yet it unfortunately appears that many of Routledge’s descriptions
are, unfortunately, somewhat inaccurate.
His article goes onto
discuss anorexia as , ‘normally affecting teenagers coping with the pains of
adolescence’ . Firstly, ‘anorexia’ itself is
the scientific term for ‘loss of appetite, ‘anorexia nervosa’ actually
being the psychological condition. Secondly, by ascribing a group to
whom this ‘anorexia’ ‘normally’ affects
it appears the writing is indulging in a little bit of labelling. Although
around 40% of those who suffer from anorexia are adolescent females, such generalising
statements can do little constructive in terms of increasing the awareness of a
serious and limiting eating disorder.
People of both genders as well as
a diverse number of ages face eating
disorders – and by ascribing statistics
to a particular range of people, this is not helpful for awareness or openness.
Ultimately, many more people outside adolescence do face eating disorders – but
it is these reductionist views such as what Routledge is perpetuating which can
limit people in coming forward for help.
Then Routledge goes on to allude to his own adolescent years
in the 1940’s and 1950’s, a time when, apparently, ‘Kids didn’t hurt themselves
deliberately – indeed there was no such verb as “to self harm’. There perhaps was not the same awareness of
children hurting themselves deliberately, but it unfortunately, and undoubtedly,
was happening. After all, the term "self-mutilation" occurred in a
study by L. E. Emerson in 1913, consisting of recordings of various records of
self harm – practised over the years. It is easy to idealise the past as being unaffected
by mental illness as people perhaps did not have the same awareness. But not having the proper awareness of
something does not mean it does not exist.
Therefore, I believe this is why it is important to spread
and emphasize awareness in regards to mental health, as well as give opinion. Routledge
is entitled to his own views of course, but it is unfortunate that he seems limited by language, as well by the
past.
He admits, in terms of how to
address rising mental health issues - ‘This
old soul doesn’t know’. Still, he offers
an area of blame for these mental health problems – what he calls the ‘anti-social
media’. He cites online bullying and
various forms of peer pressure facilitated by the internet as substantially
contributing to mental health problems.
Yet although people’s problems and anxieties may be exacerbated by external
factors such as the media, the cause of
mental illness is mental – in the mind. It is in diverting away from the
mysteries of the mind and attempting to blame or bolster against things
external which seems alienating on Routledge’s part, rather than accepting. Wow
– I thought, stunned, as I read the line: ‘The generation going through this
ordeal will have to find its own solutions.’
Here stings the implication that mental illness is an
apparent ‘experience’ of adolescence, aggravated by the adolescent themselves.
And that is why I have such an issue with Routledge’s article – as it appears to smack strongly of a tone
of blame. Of course it is important for this generation to be proactive,
but it is a generation of course part of community – where services should be available
and accessible to all, at the right stages, according to mental health. However, Routledge reckons that ‘perhaps the
kids themselves will come to understand the madness of making each other mentally
ill.’ Thus comes to a close an article
based on the blame of social media and adolescent vulnerabilities as a major cause of mental illness.
Yet social media can be used as a force for good and mental expansion
– as reflected in the number of areas of support through Facebook, blogs and Twitter,
to name a few. Yes, this is a way in which the ‘the generation going through
this ordeal’ is finding its own solutions.’
For effectiveness, for energy in working to help people out of
illness – NOT circumstance – is spread through AWARENESS. There is nothing as cold and condescending as being told to consider
the ‘madness of making each other mentally ill’ and I’m sure others will agree.
Routledge is a Mirror columnist with the Tagline ‘tell that
to the young people of today and they won’t believe you.’ I am still a young
person yet I believe his article even
though I don’t want to. I For I know and believe that unfortunately this
prejudice and stigmatisation, sweeping assumptions and inhumane treatment of
people with mental illness continues. Social media can perpetuate problematic situations,
yes, but also can often offer a medium of breaking out of this, and can indeed
be a force of good.
It is ultimately awareness, which allows for a positive force to take
action. Mental illness makes people
ill, not their adolescence or extra-curricular
activities. Of course social media
can be used unhealthily, but it can also be a force for change. Just like an
opinion column with these statistics on mental health could be used to drive
positive change, but appears to have fallen into something a lot more unhealthy
– a cycle of blame.
No comments:
Post a Comment