Media Discrimination of Mentally Ill Persons - Coursework Example

Media Discrimination of Mentally Ill Persons Mental Health and relationship with Television and Drama Forward People affected with mental illness are most disadvantaged and misrepresented in the community. Most of them experience social and economic adversities due to their illnesses. In many cases, people defend themselves by imposing discrimination against other people. As such, a person may think that he or she is running away from the reality. A person may assume that discrimination keeps him or her away from uncomfortable questions, facing reality, and encountering challenges. However, this is a dangerous way of handling issues. As a result, disadvantaged groups are marginalized in the society leading to pain and suffering. This act limits the human capacity and damages the world because it creates a loophole for misunderstanding. Introduction People with mental illnesses experience discrimination in their day-to-day lives. For example, they may be denied job opportunities, accommodation, relationship, and adequate services among many others. Moreover, the people who try to help them, such as family members, may also experience discrimination. Every time a solution against discrimination is offered, there are hardly enough people willing to comply. There are many frontiers in the world today advocating for equality and fight against discrimination. Fighting discrimination has not been an easy task. Reason being people have different myths regarding mental illnesses. Every society has its own believes that guides its people when it comes to interacting with persons with mental disabilities. Mental illnesses form a very complex issue that involves a lot of conditions. It requires variety of diagnoses, treatment and services. Even so, when a mentally ill person is asked about his or her opinion, he or she may say that all they need is to have a fulfilling life are a home, a job, and a friend. Some time back, when a person was diagnosed with a serious mental illness, he or she was given very little hope that he or she may ever return to a normal state or have a normal life again. In the modern days, recovery of such cases in possible. Scientists argue that recovery does not mean full normalcy from symptoms, but the patient is expected to regain a normal healthy way of life. Experts in health fields suggest that the best recovery manner is nurtured mutual relationships. When friends, family and service providers become friends of mentally ill persons, they help them recover from their states. Such friendship encourages sharing life experiences which give the affected persons a chance to discover that they are not outcasts in the community. A comprehensive mental system will be the perfect solution to impending cases of mental diseases. The system should link formal services, community support, and connect to broader health and social services systems. This paper focuses on discussing poor representation of mentally ill patients through the media. It analyses two separate areas of literature with an aim of evaluating the extend that media misrepresents individuals with mental health problems. The paper seeks to analyse how media portray mental disorders. In extend, the paper digs deep to evaluate whether the portrayals are sympathetic or whether they stigmatize those with mental health issues. Part two seeks to address the relationship between violence and mental disorder. It also seeks to discover the relationship between schizophrenia and violence. On another note, the paper discusses personality disorder and the factors that make it difficult to come up with solid conclusions about causality in relationship with mental disorders. The mass media’s impact on public perception on mental illness The mass media is one of the most significant influences in perceptions and degree to which individuals get exposed to media representation. In the modern days, the largest source of information is the media. Even so, when it comes to mental illness, the media tends to distort reality (Rose, 1998: 213). Whether in a better or worse situation, the media is responsible in shaping our ways of perceiving things. The media portrays issues of mental health in many negative perceptions hence, influencing our judgment. Even when the intentions are clean and straight for positive purposes, people always misunderstand the media portrayal of mental illness. For example, the media sends inaccurate depiction about schizophrenia by confusing it with multiple personality disorder (Rose, 1998: 215). In return, people begin to form false beliefs because of confusion which leads to mentally ill patients not getting treated or delay in their treatment. Mental illnesses contrast other forms of diseases because they are associated with stigma (Rose, 1998: 215). It does not matter the source of the stigma, whether self-directed or societal based, dealing with its effects can be devastating hence causing interference in the daily ways of living. Due to these adverse effects, the mentally ill continue to suffer from negative treatment and negative attention. This happens mostly due to fear and prejudice. Due to media influence on people, mentally ill people are often pushed away from the warmth of society (Taylor and Gunn, 1999: 9). Extinguishing the stigma surrounding mental illness may be a difficult task but if the media develops positive methods of portraying mental disorders, it would be a step towards curbing the misunderstanding surrounding the stigma. The media is engraved with great powers of disseminating information (Taylor and Gunn, 1999: 10). However, it still runs and reinforces the ancient stereotypes. For example, most television stations present deranged and violent killers ignoring the fact that mental illness is a component of the general public. Statistics indicate that mental illness affects at least one in every four Americans (Taylor and Gunn, 1999: 12). Observations of the soap operas indicate that they exploit the elements of fictional mental disorders. The audiences of such programs end up being brainwashed by the portrayals of the media elements. Proponents of television films and programs assume that depicting erroneous mental disorders in films in exaggerated proportion is not reality (Taylor and Gunn, 1999: 13). There are reasons supporting the fact of the statement that the media is not responsible enough in representing people with mental disorders. Most cases press coverage is the strongest factors that influence beliefs op people about mental health (Taylor and Gunn, 1999: 14). The media has been careless because it links every criminal story with mental illness. Every station and every newspaper displays the vices of mental health in negative proportions by linking it to violence and every criminal activity. People in the society are meant to believe that people with mental disorders are a danger to the society (Rose, 1998: 220). But the mere truth is that the likelihood of a mentally ill person to commit crime is equal a healthy person. There has been no increase in deaths or madder cases caused by mentally ill persons in America for the last twenty years. However, statistics reveal that fear level of the mentally ill persons in the community has increased at a great proportion (Rose, 1998: 222). The media disregard the rights of mentally ill persons. Mentally ill people are as important to the community as other people. They deserve respect, support and high quality services just as other people suffering from other illnesses (Prins, 2005: 337-340). The myths that run around media formats and media societies create discrimination in all societies. These myths stimulated by media sources erode the confidence of mental patients and their self-esteem. It becomes difficult for them to seek medical care (Pirkis and Francis, 2012). People fail to recognize early mental health symptoms or from seeking help due to low self-esteem. Statistics reveal that very few people are willing to pursue careers in mental health due to the stigma involved (Tummy and Turner, 2008). Mentally affected people are excluded from the labor forces as they are thought to be unproductive and poor in decision making or judgmental skills. Analyses of American statistics indicate that almost 46% of all media coverage is about crime, and harm, either self or otherwise (Tummy and Turner, 2008). Only 8% of all media coverage gave advice touching on mental health and discrimination against mentally ill people (Pirkis and Francis, 2012). Nearly 80% of all mental health issues are found in the tabloids and broadsheets. Political support, funding and services relating to mental health cover less than one fifth of all media coverage (Pirkis and Francis, 2012). An incredible number of researches have revealed that media are the public’s biggest source of information on mental illnesses. With specific reference to television and drama, people regard information they see from these media very highly (Adair, 1988). Televisions and films emphasize that people with mental disabilities and illnesses are considered as ‘others’ in the community. They are designed to fit their own category that is separate from the general public. Those that support mentally ill people are depicted as subhuman in most occasions on films and on television programs. There is an immense power in words (Botha, Koen and Niehaus, 2006). Any word said has a potential capability of hurting the feelings of another person (Hazelton, 1997: 73). Words have a capability of building a person’s attitude and in return shaping that person’s social behaviour. The media are known to use words that are sensational and provocative. These words degenerate myths about mental illnesses that create incorrect assumptions as well as building fear among members of the society (Hazelton, 1997: 77). The media capitalizes on the fear of violence and irrational depositions that mentally ill people can create due to misunderstanding. For example, some films and television programs depict a mentally ill person being violent to strangers (Hazelton, 1997: 78). In the real world, such cases are very rare; in fact, most violent cases witnessed will always involve people not affected with mental illnesses. The media makes it appear like mentally ill persons are always on the verge to causing violence (Hazelton, 1997: 79). Sympathetic media attributes In another perspective, the media is sympathetic with people with mental illnesses. The only problem is how they represent these people. The media engages in positive representation of mentally ill people but they sent the wrong or inaccurate depictions every time (Dietrich and Angermeyer, 2006: 318). These wrong depictions are also very harmful because they are always misinterpreted. For instance, a character in a television program or a film may be depicted in a sympathetic way; the inaccurate depiction will cause harm than good to public perception. The portrayal hinders people in advancing their knowledge about mental illnesses (Dietrich and Angermeyer, 2006: 320). Members who are faced with cases of mental illness may fear to take their patients for treatment due to lack of matching symptoms with those they see in films and television programs (Dietrich and Angermeyer, 2006: 321). Most of the time television representations of schizophrenia symptoms always sent confusing messages leading to confidence loss in diagnosis of such cases. Family members and ill individuals are hindered from recognizing the onset of schizophrenia due to a false depiction of symptoms (Cutliffe & Hanningan, 200: 315). The way media represents mental illness facilitate discrimination regardless of the intended purpose (Dietrich and Angermeyer, 2006: 322). Examples of positive portrayals There are media formats that are critically engaged in changing the perception of mental illness to the general public. For example, media are publishing newsletters through the internet (Coverdale, Nairm & Claasen, 2002: 697-700). The title of their article is ‘Stigma Busters’. It reports on media’s portrayals of mental illnesses. They use highlighting technique to create an impact on what the media reports. Every positive attribute that the media touches reflecting on mental illness is highlighted and repeated for emphasis (Coverdale, Nairm & Claasen, 2002: 697-700). Characteristics of fictional mentally ill characters When people are doing character assimilation of mentally ill people they should be in a position to realize that the mentally ill cannot represent themselves. This calls for responsible assimilation of mentally ill cases because these characters are what the society uses as a mirror to reflect the images of mentally ill people (Botha, Koen & Niehaus, 2006: 623). Fictional imagery is a very powerful tool in depicting characteristics of any phenomena. In most cases, audiences of films and television programs are left with a feeling that they know and understand what a mentally ill person is characterized by just by watching programs or films (Francis et al, 2001). The author will go to greater lengths with an aim of making sure that he or she gets the kind of understanding he or she wants with the audience. Even so, authors observe cultural norms and beliefs about mental illness and capitalize on them to build their characters (Morris, 2006). Morris (2006) states that one characteristic of a fictional mentally ill person is eccentricity. The character is given unusual role or behaviour in the film or program. In most cases, the eccentric behaviour is associated with positive attributes but along the way the behaviour changes and the character displays lack of control and lack of accountability for his or her actions (Nairn & Coverdale, 2005: 281). The eccentric habits are hard to understand because the author depicts the originality of human minds and independence in its originality such that it cannot be conformed to societal norms. Fictional mentally ill characters (Nairn & Coverdale, 2005: 281) are made to depict a sense of poor judgmental skills and lack of comprehension in what they do. These characters are always made to portray negative attributes that contradict the normal living conditions of a human being (Nairn & Coverdale, 2005: 281). Mentally ill characters are made to depict their lack of comprehension of standards of normal behaviour in their culture (Nairn & Coverdale, 2005: 281). Fictional characters are made to suit characteristics that the author thinks are more appealing to the audience. These characters do not care about society’s disapproval of their habits or beliefs. Character assimilation gives false impression about a condition in a given genre of people. Mental disabilities are depicted in most character assimilations to be dangerous and violent. It is portrayed as a social demon that the community should be afraid of and avoid at all costs. Mentally ill people are displayed to be antisocial (Wahl, 1995). They do not like interacting with other human beings. They love solitude hence; it creates fear in the minds of the audience regarding interactions with mentally ill people. They are portrayed to have a sense of violent behaviour which enhances fear in the minds of other people. Such depictions make it almost impossible to eradicate the stigma that comes with mental illnesses. Discrimination continues to be part of normal life as people do not understand the feelings of mentally ill people (Nairn & Coverdale, 2005: 283). Violence, schizophrenia and mental disorder The second part of this paper is to evaluate the relationship between mental disorder and violence. There are three questions that this section seeks to answer. The first question is: do mentally ill people possess violence? Do the mentally ill have greater risks of violence exposure? And last, is the public at risk under situations of mental disorders? In many comprehensive researches, the outcomes suggest that mental disorders do not form any part of violence stimulation. However, analysts found out that substance abuse is the greatest stimulus to violence whether one uses it under a mental illness or without one (Nairn & Coverdale, 2005: 284). Often, members of the public exaggerate relationships between mental illnesses and violence. The way the public perceive mental illness, and violence stands in the way of eradicating stigma and discrimination (Nairn & Coverdale, 2005: 285). People assume that the mentally ill are always violent hence justifying bullying and victimizing mentally ill people. Violence is turning the other way round. Instead of mentally ill people to be violent, the public becomes violent to them in very serious rates that involve hitting, punching, being beaten up or sometimes threatening their lives. Research indicates that seriously mentally ill people are criminally victimized. Such instances lead to violence eruption and reactions as self defence mechanisms for mentally ill people (Paterson, 2001: 257). It is impossible to distinguish acts of violence committed by mentally ill people basing the argument on their mental state. The risk of violence occurrence under mentally ill people is as normal as an ordinary person may be gauged. The mentally ill people are at a greater risk of being prone to violence because the general public has negative perceptions towards them (Paterson, 2001: 258). The public does not care about controlling the violence exposed to mental patients because of the notion that they are also violent and dangerous to the society. It is hard to access the public risk of violence caused by mentally ill people. In cases where there are violent reports, the living conditions within the social life of the mental patients must be very low. The family members of mentally ill people are more prone to violence in case it emanates from their sick member. Such cases happen at home hence, the public is safe from such incidences. Mentally ill patients a less likely target stranger hence, the likelihood of them creating violence to the public is very low (Paterson, 2001: 259). Relationship between schizophrenia and violence Unpredicted violence is the most terrifying experience a person can think of. It is true that patients with mental illnesses sometimes commit bizarre and unpredicted violence. Studies show that there are very few if at all there are cases of patients diagnosed with schizophrenia. When a patient exhibit signs of psychotic symptoms, the risk of violence rises up (Cohen, 1972). Even so, it is not only the symptoms that show signs of violence but also some of the characteristics of the symptoms. Patients with schizophrenia exhibit normal rates of violence just as ordinary public. Research indicates that schizophrenia patients who turn violent end up committing suicide. Patients with schizophrenia have a likelihood of committing homicide acts. The cases significantly rise in cases where a patient uses other substances (Cohen, 1972). The disorder challenges the judgmental part of a person making it difficult to identify what is real and what is not real. Patients exhibit cases of failure to think clearly, manage emotions, relate to others or even function normally (Dietrich & Angermeyer, 2006: 322). If the signs and symptoms are identified early, the condition is easily managed. Patients with this condition believe that all the time other people are trying to harm them. They contain a feeling of being trailed all the time. These patients are the most harmless when it comes to violence. They are always in constant fear that distract from engaging in activities that will generate more fear or harm to the way they view things (Dietrich & Angermeyer, 2006: 322). Violence is not a factor that portrays or indicates that a person is affected by schizophrenia. Schizophrenia patients are very calm and cannot cause harm to themselves let alone other people. The only problem that is challenging many people is the confusion created around by media houses. They confuse schizophrenia symptoms with mental disorder symptoms. They link violence acts with schizophrenia without determining the real cause of the violence. Such patients are withdrawn from public domain and like hiding and staying quietly under solitude. In many cases, drugs and alcohol use and abuse are what triggers violence in patients diagnosed with schizophrenia (Dietrich & Angermeyer, 2006: 322). Personality disorder Researchers argue that when analysing risk of violence in personality disorder there is a need to evaluate beyond risk factors. Personality disorder is classified as a mental disorder through which an individual exhibit unhealthy patterns in the way he or she thinks, functions, or behave (Cutliffe & Hannigan, 2001: 319). People affected with the condition often do not relate with other people in a healthy manner and they often have trouble analysing situations that face them. Most patients are not aware whether they have personality disorder because they take the way they think and perceive things to be very natural. Often, they blame others for their demises and the challenges they face (Cutliffe & Hannigan, 2001: 319). Personality disorders have shown possibilities of patients exhibiting violent reactions. The effect of the disorders may lead a person to committing acts of violence without the knowledge that they are doing wrong. The patients exhibit extreme reactions such as extreme Unger when they think that they have been offended. Such instances assert the speculations run by media houses on effects of such disorders hence, the sick people continue to face discrimination at all levels of their lives (Cutliffe & Hannigan, 2001: 321). Victimization experiences Mentally ill persons are always on the verge of victimization in criminal activities. Due to their vulnerability, they faced with little choices that to fall under victimization. Due to crime victimization, the mentally ill people change their character from rehabilitative to worse. They developed an increased feeling of anxiety and low abilities to interact with the outside world (Adair, 1988). Incidents’ involving a mentally ill person, the ill person is always put to blame and victimized even when he is on the right side. Even so, resent researchers have embarked on developing research that distinguishes mentally ill persons’ characters with those of ordinary public. They focus on showing that mentally ill patients are very much victimized just as other people. Statistics indicate that a person with severe mental disorder is twelve times likely to be victimized compared to a normal person (Adair, 1988). People with schizophrenia disorder have less likelihood of victimization as compared to the general public. They have lower rates of recorded crime hence lower rates of victimization. The above statement contrasts the general overviews that people with mental disorders are most likely to be victimized (Cohen, 1972). One reason is because schizophrenia patients are less likely to report crime activities and are less prone to criminal activities. Paranoia in patients with schizophrenia will discourage their involvement in violent acts or criminal activities (Cohen, 1972). Conclusion The media misrepresents mentally ill people through many ways. For example, playing films that depict mentally ill people in a bad way or playing programs that do not inform the public about real facts of mentally ill patients. Fiction characters are made to capture the attention of the audience hence the author of a story will ignore the reality of mental illnesses in order to appeal to his or her audience. These are among the factors that continue to enhance stigmatization and discrimination of mentally ill persons. Over the recent years, media are engaging in sensitizing stigmatization in order to curb discrimination. Media are trying as much as possible to disseminate the right kind of information in order to correct the misery. Even so, the world is faced with a long journey to curb discrimination because film producers continue to produce and mentally disabled characters continue to be used and misrepresented. Reference List Adair, J. (1988) Effective representation of mentally ill persons:London: Pan Books. Botha, U. A., Koen, L., & Niehaus, D. J. H. (2006) Perceptions of a South African schizophrenia population with regards to community attitudes towards their illness. Social Psychology and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 41, 619-623. Cohen, S. (1972) Folk Devils and Moral Panics: The Creation of the Mods and Rockers. Oxford: Martin Robertson Coverdale, J., Nairn, R. & Claasen, D. (2002) Depictions of mental illness in print media: A prospective national sample. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 36(5), 697–700. Cutliffe, J. R. & Hannigan, B. (2001) Mass media, "monsters" and mental health clients: The need for increased lobbying. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 8(4), 315–321. Dietrich, S. & Angermeyer, M. C. (2006) Influence of newspaper reporting on adolescents’ attitudes toward people with mental illness. Social Psychology and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 41, 318-322.Francis, C., Pirkis, J., Dunt, D. & Blood, R. W. (2001) Mental health and illness in the media: A review of the literature. Canberra, ACT: Commonwealth Department of Health and Aged Care. Hazelton, M. (1997) Reporting mental health: A discourse analysis of mental health related news in two Australian newspapers. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Mental Health Nursing, 6(2), 73-89 Morris, G. (2006) Mental Health Issues and the Media. New York:Routledge Nairn, R. G. & Coverdale, J. H. (2005) People never see us living well: an appraisal of the personal stories about mental illness in prospective print media sample. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 39, 281-287. Paterson, B. (2001). Social policy and mental illness in England in the 1990s: violence, moral panic and critical discourse. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing.8: 257-267 Peay, J. (2012) Mental disorder offenders,mental health, and crime.in M. Maguire,R. Morgan and R. Pirkis, J. & Francis, C. (2012) Mental illness in the news and information media: A critical review. Canberra, ACT: Commonwealth Department of Health and Aged Care. Prins, H. (2005) Mental disorder and violent crime: A problematic relationship. Probation Journal. 52(4):337-357 Rose, D. (1998). Television, madness and community care. Journal of Community & Social Psychology, 8(3), 213–228 Taylor, P. and Gunn, J. (1999) Homicides by people with mental illness: myth and reality British Journal of Psychiatry. 174: 9-14 Tummey, R. and Turner, T. (eds) (2008) Critical Issues in Mental Health. Basingstoke: Palgrave Wahl, O. (1995) Illness Media Madness: Public Images of Mental. New Jersey: Rutgers University Press. Read More