Mental Health
June 20, 2004 7:50 AM
Subscribe
Question about mental health and the developing world. More inside.
Recently I had an interesting online conversation with a friend in Nepal. My friend comes from an ordinary background by Nepalese standards, has never left the country, and is certainly not one of the elite. We had a discussion about 'stress' - he had a hard time grasping the whole concept of how people in rich countries suffer so much because of stress.
One of a few things may be true, and I'm not sure which. So some input with people of experience of this may be helpful...
Either people in the Third World (or particular cultures) are much much less prone to mental health issues we have in the West, such as stress and depression, because their culture is so utterly different and because so many people
are focused on just day to day survival. (In much the same way as we don't get malaria or bilharzia - the cultural environment is as different as the physical environment).
Or health care in countries such as Nepal is at a much lower level, so people suffer the same mental health issues but they go largely untreated.
Or possibly, what I suspect, being human they have many mental health problems of their own, but the cultural difference means they are manifested in a different way. I believe, for instance, that in rural Nepal, because of the civil war, many people suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder. The way this is manifested may be different due to cultural differences, and also may well go untreated as physical survival takes priority over mental health care.
Anyone have any experience of this?
How do mental health issues differ across different countries in the developing world?
posted by plep to society & culture (7 comments total)
1 - not developing world, but here in chile the middle class (and presumably upper class too) seem much more likely to go see psychiatrists than in the uk. my impression is it's much closer to the us style.
2 - in the book i'm currently reading - the tangled wing - konner describes one culture (bali, iirc) where showing "negative" emotion is pretty much taboo. a woman is criticised for being upset on hearing of the death of her partner, and later praised for changing behaviour and smiling and joking. the point being that the praise reflects the communal recognition that what she did was difficult. in other words, emotions tend to be universal (a central theme of the book), but how they are expressed within a culture will, of course, vary widely. further, i would have thought that stress is a very basic human response, associated with physical changes in the primitive part of the brain (related to fight/flight, etc). with that kind of definition, it would not just be universal to humans, but also to mammals and probably other aimals too (depending on just how "low level" in the brain such changes occur).
so i go with your third "Or".
posted by andrew cooke at 8:25 AM on June 20, 2004