Prevalence of Mental Illness in Singapore

Discuss about the Mental Health and the Media for Borderline and Narcissistic.
 

Mental ill health is one of the major challenges facing the healthcare sector in Singapore. According to information from the Institute of Mental Health (IMH), there is a high prevalence of mental illness in the country. In 201, for instance, 9.8% of the Singapore residents would be diagnosed with at least one of the anxiety or mood disorders in their lifetime. That shows that Singapore, as a nation, is worse-off when it comes to mental health. A large number of Singapore residents have been suffering from anxious emotional, impulsive, and suspicious personality disorders like schizoid, borderline, narcissistic, paranoid, obsessive compulsive disorders. The situation is worsening because the people do not have enough knowledge to deal with such personality disorders. Even the media which should be at the fore front of educating people and equipping them with the skills to use in managing the conditions are to blame for its laxity. The print, broadcast, and electronic media has been derailing the war against personality disorders because they mislead the members of the public by propagating the culture of stigmatization. 

In Singapore, there is a free media. All the Singaporeans have an unrestricted access to the print, broadcast, and electronic media such as the television (TV), movies, radio, newspapers, journals, blogs, websites, and social media. Each of these media platforms is essential because the people can virtually not live without them. They are necessary because they help in informing the members of the public, educating them, and giving them a platform to communicate with one another. At the same time, media has been helpful in entertaining the Singaporeans and giving them an opportunity to enjoy pleasurable moments (Arnold & Boggs, 2015). That is why most of the people especially the youth are fond of social media sites like the YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, and the like. When it comes to health matters, the media is not left out. Over the years, the Singaporeans have been using it as a powerful tool to educate the public and communicate health-related matters.

Despite its significant contributions in the healthcare sector, the Singaporean media has failed to positively contribute towards the war against mental ill-health.  The mainstream media-TV, radio, newspapers, magazines, and films have not been doing a commendable job as far as mental illnesses are concerned (Canvin, Rugkåsa, Sinclair & Burns, 2014). Although there are some media houses which have been helping in sensitizing the members of the public on all the matters related to mental illness, there are others which have been doing a disservice to it (Braithwaite & Schrodt, 2014). There are many instances where some of these media platforms have been giving a false impression of the people with mental illnesses like personality disorders.

Media in Singapore

The first way through which the mainstream media has been derailing the war against mental illness is that it has been negatively depicting the condition. There are many instances where the media houses have been releasing information that gives wrong information on the causes of mental illnesses. Many at times, the media have been blaming the mentally-ill persons for their problem because they assume that they are responsible for it (Manuel & Crowe, 2014).  Some media houses have been peddling unnecessary believes on mental ill-health such as the linking of the conditions to a curse. The Hoarders is an example of a TV series that never did much to educate people on the hoarding disorder as expected. The linking of personality disorders to a generational curse is a very bad thing because it renders the mentally-ill vulnerable in the society. Such media houses are operated by the people who still hold obsolete beliefs that have no place in the 21^st century (Gerlinger, Hauser, Hert, Lacluyse, Wampers & Correll, 2013). They deliberately choose not to present the truth despite them knowing that such personality disorders are purely biological and have nothing to do with religious or cultural beliefs. 

The other way through which the media derails the war against personality disorders is that it gives wrong information on the roles of the mentally-ill on the management of their conditions. Here are many occasions where the media have been blaming the patients for their illnesses. For example, there are certain newspaper articles or radio programs which portray the mentally-ill persons as irresponsible people with whom no one should associate (Rogers & Pilgrim, 2014). At the same time, there are situations where media has been portraying the personality disorder patients as violent persons who can attack and harm anyone whenever they get any slightest opportunity to do so. That is not true because it misleads people to have negative perception towards the mentally-ill patients (Chang, Wu, Chen, Wang & Lin, 2014). The media houses should not do so because they are written by professional journalists who have a sound knowledge of all the ethical standards that govern their discipline. Hence, instead of misleading the public, such people should be responsible in their actions. Meaning, they should always refrain from publishing wrong information. Although not all media houses do this, there are many cases of irresponsible reporting which end up hurting the people with mental illness as well as their loved ones.

Failures of the Media

The social media has also been used to the disadvantage of the people who suffer from personality disorders. In Singapore, many people have become obsessed with the social sites like YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, MySpace, just to mention, but a few. These media platforms are popular with many Singaporeans especially the techno-savvy youthful populations. These people use the social media to communicate, network, enjoy pleasurable moments, and share information (Pilgrim, 2017). However, despite all these benefits, there are many people who have been misusing these sites. Instead of using them for the right purpose, such people abuse and use them to spread inaccurate information about the people with mental illness. For example, there are many instances where the Facebook users post pictures of mentally-ill persons and write defamatory captions against them (Dew, Scott & Kirkman, 2016). Such defamatory information include the depiction of the patients as dirty, violent, I don’t carers, and pariah people with whom no one should associate. At times, the social media users might post a picture of a mentally-ill person and give a negative description about them. That has become a tendency because the social media sites like Facebook are not properly regulated. Hence, many people can just use other people’s images without their consent and goes scot-free. However, even if such people engage in such acts thinking that it is pleasurable, they fail to acknowledge that they are negatively impacting on the war against mental illnesses in the country.  

The other media platform that has been misused in Singapore is video. For a very long time, the people of Singapore have been consuming video products created locally and internationally. Although each film is created to communicate a specific issue of concern to the society, there are any instances where videos have been used to fight the people with mental illnesses. Certain films do a disservice to the people with mental illnesses because they depict them in a negative way. Instead of motivating the mentally-ill persons or their families to and educating them to seek for medical intervention, such films often choose to mislead the public by giving an inaccurate image of the people with mental illnesses without considering how challenging it is to live in such a situation (Denecke, et al., 2015). Fight Club is an example of a film that succeeded in giving a negative impression of mental illness. Such a film shows how the film producers have been taking advantage of the people with mental illnesses to make money without necessarily thinking about their welfare. Whether it is done intentionally or not, such films are harmful because they hinder and derail the war against mental illnesses in the country. The negative depiction of the people with mental illness is bad because it negatively impacts on the victims.

Social Media Impact

Media is an influential tool that can cause massive changes in the society. If it is used well, it can help a great deal. However, if misused, the media can cause massive harms to the people. The negative depiction of the people with mental illness by the mainstream and social media platforms has been faulted as a disservice to the society. It is a bad tendency because it does not add value to the lives of the people who suffer from mental disorders or personality disorders because it negatively impact on them in many ways.

The first way through which the negative coverage of mental illness affects Singaporeans is that it encourages the culture of stigmatization of the people with personality disorders in the country. Once people realize the media condones and propagates stigmatization, they will have no choice but to join the band wagon thinking that stigmatization is an acceptable practice that harms no one. Public stigmatization is harmful to the mentally-ill persons because it can make life quite challenging for them. When everyone in the society blames the sick for their conditions, it might be hard for them to fit into the society because of a feeling of neglect and isolation. Such levels of stigmatization may even result into the deprivation of rights such as healthcare, employment and education (Denecke, et al., 2015). However, these are fundamental rights and opportunities that should be availed to everyone regardless of their health status. They should not be denied to anyone on the basis of their mental condition.

The other way through which this practice affects mental illness is that it discourages people from seeking for mental care from the healthcare facilities within their respective areas of residence. The feeling of irresponsibility makes many people shy away from going for psychological evaluation, laboratory tests, and physical examination to find out if they might be having any personality illness-related symptoms. The people may fear such diagnoses thinking that if in any case they are diagnosed with any [personality disorder, they would be stigmatized, discriminated, and subjected to all manners of oppression in the midst of their people. Hence, in the long-run, it means that such media misrepresentations interfere with the general fight against mental illnesses in the country.  Media can be destructive because it is a very influential tool that is trusted by nearly everyone in the country (Subramaniam, 2017). Meaning, anything that the media supports is viewed as true and should not be opposed no matter how destructive it might be. 

Video Impact

It is quite unfortunate that the media has been at the fore front of encouraging the culture of stigmatization. This is a bad practice that has been slowing the pace of the war against personality disorders in the nation. Media is a very influential platform whose misuse can have a massive negative impact on the people. It is a high time the government and people of Singapore comes up and takes the necessary measures to salvage the situation (Naslund, Grande, Aschbrenner & Elwyn, 2014). One of the ways through which this issue can be ultimately resolved is by coming up with a new policy framework to stringently regulate the usage of mainstream and social media in the country. The government should ensure that every media user abides by rules failure to which they should be prosecuted before a court of law. All media houses should ensure that any publication made is compliant with the legal and ethical standards in the country. Apart from this, the government, media houses, and other concerned stakeholders should educate the public on responsible ways of consuming the mainstream and social media. If all these are done, the cases of misuse, stigmatization, and inaccurate depiction of the

Personally, I am looking forward to be a model healthcare professional who would be emulated by other people interested in leaving a positive mark in the field of health care. If I get an opportunity to serve as a healthcare practitioner, I will strive to do my best to ensure that the quality of healthcare services delivered to the public is exceptionally high. I will not hesitate to actively participate in addressing touchy issues such as mental ill-health. I know that my success as a medical practitioner relies on the kind of cooperation that I will be getting from other stakeholders such as the media. I will be so delighted if the media does its best to positively contribute towards the improvement of the quality of healthcare services in the country (Subramaniam, 2017). However, if the mainstream and social media platforms fail to discharge their duties effectively, I will have to be personally affected. I will be unhappy because I know that media is a very influential agent whose abuse can e disastrous to the country’s healthcare system.  

The first way through which a negative coverage of mental illness will affect me is by demoralizing me. It will make me to lose faith the media because of the ways it derails the efforts of the healthcare practitioners in providing a solution to mental ill-health which has been a major issue of concern in Singapore. When the people use the media to propagate the culture of stigmatization of the people with mental illness, it means that they are trying to say that they are not interested in the realization of a mental illness-free society (Bagdikian, 2014). However, as a professional, I will not buy this idea because it has no value to add to the society in which I belong.

Media’s Influence

The other way through which the negative coverage of mental illness will impact on me is that it will pose a challenge to me to do something and strive to be part of a solution to the problem. As a concerned practitioner, I would not sit down and watch the situation worsen. Instead, what I will do is that I will take it upon myself to be at the forefront of advocating for change. The first thing I will do is to advocate for policy change in as far as the use of mass media is concerned. I will have to collaborate with other like-minded people to petition the government to consider formulating and enforcing new policies to help in regulating the usage of mass media in the country (Barlow, 2012). Apart from advocating for the banning of stigmatization, misrepresentation and the mental illnesses, I will request the government to come up with punitive measures to deal with any violators. The last action I will take to rectify the situation is to personally participate in public education campaigns. I will partner with relevant stakeholders to roll-out campaigns to sensitize the members of the public on all the matters pertaining to mental illness such as the causes, symptoms, dangers of stigmatization, and the role of medical check-ups, family and communal support to the people with mental illnesses. If I do all these, I will definitely make a positive contribution towards the eradication of mental illnesses in the country. 

References

Arnold, E.C. & Boggs, K.U. (2015). Interpersonal relationships: Professional communication skills for nurses. New York: Elsevier Health Sciences.

Barlow, D. (2012). The Oxford Handbook of Clinical Psychology. New York: Oxford University    Press.

Braithwaite, D.O. & Schrodt, P. eds. (2014). Engaging theories in interpersonal communication:Multiple perspectives. New York: Sage Publications.

Bagdikian, B.H., 2014. The new media monopoly: A completely revised and updated edition with seven new chapters. Beacon Press.

Canvin, K., Rugkåsa, J., Sinclair, J. & Burns, T. (2014). Patient, psychiatrist and family carer experiences of community treatment orders: qualitative study. Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology, 49(12), pp.1873-1882.

Chang, C. C., Wu, T. H., Chen, C. Y., Wang, J. D., & Lin, C. Y. (2014). Psychometric evaluation of the internalized stigma of mental illness scale for patients with mental

illnesses: measurement invariance across time. PLoS One, 9(6), e98767.

Denecke, K., Bamidis, P., Bond, C., Gabarron, E., Househ, M., Lau, A.Y.S., Mayer, M.A., Merolli, M. & Hansen, M., 2015. Ethical issues of social media usage in healthcare.

Yearbook of medical informatics, 10(1), p.137.

Dew, K., Scott, A. & Kirkman, A., (2016). Health and the Mass Media. In Social, Political and Cultural Dimensions of Health (pp. 233-244). Cham: Springer, Cham. 

Gerlinger, G., Hauser, M., Hert, M., Lacluyse, K., Wampers, M., & Correll, C. U. (2013).

Personal stigma in schizophrenia spectrum disorders: a systematic review of prevalence rates, correlates, impact and interventions. World Psychiatry, 12(2), 155-164.

Manuel, J., & Crowe, M. (2014). Clinical responsibility, accountability, and risk aversion in mental health nursing: A descriptive, qualitative study. International journal of mental health nursing, 23(4), 336-343.

Naslund, J. A., Grande, S. W., Aschbrenner, K. A., & Elwyn, G. (2014). Naturally occurring peer support through social media: the experiences of individuals with severe mental illness using YouTube. PLOS one, 9(10), e110171.

Pilgrim, D. (2017). Key concepts in mental health. Sage. Rogers, A. & Pilgrim, D. (2014). A sociology of mental health and illness. London: McGraw- Hill Education (UK).

Subramaniam, M., Abdin, E., Picco, L., Pang, S., Shafie, S., Vaingankar, J. A., … & Chong, S. (2017). Stigma towards people with mental disorders and its components–a

perspective from multi-ethnic Singapore. Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences, 26(4),371-382.