“They Say I Have ‘Mental Health Problems’ but I’m Just Poor”
On July 9th 1982, an unemployed painter named Michael Fagan, had just lost custody of his child, after being unable to fix a leak in his apartment. He took desperate measures, breaking into Buckingham Palace to wake the Queen to share “what was really going on in the country”. His words, though spoken decades ago, echo a sentiment that remains painfully relevant today. “First the work dried up, then my confidence dried up. Then, the love in my wife’s eyes dried up. And now, I’ve been told I have ‘mental health problems.’ But I don’t. I’m just poor.”
The Queen was shocked to find that most public assistance programs had been dismantled in favor of funding a war.
Fast forward to the present, here in the United States, and we see a mirroring situation. The struggle for survival continues to breed despair and disconnection. As data accumulates, establishing a clear connection between challenging economic circumstances and mental health struggles, scientists grapple with a complex question: Which causes which?
The determinants of mental health and wellbeing are largely about the society we live in, rather than a pre determined medical condition.
Psychologist Crick Lund, from the University of Cape Town and a dedicated researcher in mental health policy, emphasizes the intricate nature of mental illness causation. Mental health challenges, he notes, are multifaceted, influenced by a combination of factors, including genetics, adverse life events, and substance abuse.
However, amidst this complexity, a growing body of evidence points to a strong correlation between poverty and mental illness, particularly in cases involving disorders like depression. The interplay between economic hardship and psychological well-being creates a challenging environment where individuals, burdened by financial constraints, find themselves vulnerable to mental health struggles.
Take for example the indigenous community : Many associations have long disregarded general eugenics beliefs or included race as a biological factor, but this still continues in the medical field. The article finds that the racialization of health contributes to continued misunderstandings about biological differences between human groups and erases important historical trauma.
I’ve encountered stereotypes about inability to handle alcohol because they are “unevolved,” and I’ve heard claims that they weaker livers or are genetically predisposed to substance abuse. These stereotypes are an easy way to ignore the social and historical misdoings that shaped our communities, or based on a few notable instances, such as some people living on tribal land causing fights or damaging their property after drinking, which are behaviors that anyone can exhibit. This perception is also compounded by the concentration of violence on reservations, which is a result of generational trauma and systemic issues. Since everyone in these communities is in one area, it may seem worse than if the same number of people committed similar acts in a large city. It is similar to how redlining has confined Black communities to certain areas, leading to concentrated poverty and systemic issues that are then mischaracterized as a “criminal culture” in these communities.
In the medical field, fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD) has often been racialized and medicalized as a Native problem, rather than a societal and generational trauma problem. It is not biological; it is systemic.
These errors limit the ability of the medical field to provide equitable care. If medical providers just assume that a group of people alcoholics or addicts because of genetics, they will not address the underlying trauma and give proper treatment for the root cause of alcoholism and trauma faced by the community.
This enduring correlation prompts a critical examination of societal structures and policies, urging us to confront the cyclical nature of poverty and mental health challenges. The narrative initiated by the unemployed painter in 1982 is still being written today, calling for a compassionate and holistic approach to address the intertwined issues of economic hardship and mental well-being.
Investing in programs aimed at eliminating poverty can have a profound impact on reducing the burden of mental health issues and their associated costs. By addressing the root causes of economic hardship, such initiatives create a foundation for improved mental well-being among individuals and communities. When people have access to stable employment, education, and essential resources, the stressors contributing to mental health challenges are alleviated. This proactive approach not only enhances the overall quality of life but also diminishes the economic strain on healthcare systems, social services, and communities. Ultimately, the synergy between poverty alleviation programs and mental health outcomes highlights a compelling opportunity for comprehensive societal betterment, where strategic investments yield dividends in both human flourishing and fiscal responsibility.
As we navigate the complexities of this ongoing struggle, it becomes imperative to have a collective understanding, advocate for mental health support, and work towards creating a society where the burden of poverty doesn’t exacerbate the weight of mental health challenges.
The journey from 1982 to today is a reminder that, despite progress, the intersection of poverty and mental health remains an urgent issue requiring our attention and collective efforts.
