Some thoughts on stigma

Even if you’ve had the most cursory of glances at a newspaper in the last couple of weeks, you would have seen the news about England cricketer Jonathan Trott who recently left the Ashes tour due to what was termed a ‘long-standing stress condition’.

That Trott was generally treated sympathetically in the media’s coverage of his departure shows that times are changing and people are beginning to realise that mental illness is something to be taken seriously. But undoubtedly there is still great stigma in admitting to a mental health problem, particularly when you are male, and particularly in such testosterone-filled environments as the world of professional sport. If you want proof of this, you only have to look at the comments sections of the online news articles about Trott, where remarks range from the fatuous to the abhorrent. While these are clearly not representative of society as a whole, they do at least suggest that stigma is still an issue.

But what exactly is stigma, and how can we make the stigma of mental illness a thing of the past? It’s helpful here to look at the origins of the word itself. The Oxford English Dictionary defines stigma as ‘a mark of disgrace associated with a particular circumstance, quality, or person’. The word originated in the late 16th century where it referred to a mark made by pricking or branding. Originally, these marks were inflicted on slaves or vagabonds to show them as soiled or dirty, which explains the word’s shift to its present metaphorical usage.

You’ll notice two things about the etymology of the word stigma – firstly, that it is manmade, something imposed upon a person. Secondly that originally it referred to something indelible, a mark unable to be removed. Stigma is certainly manmade but we know that it is not indelible – we can fight stigma by ensuring that mental health is discussed openly and honestly in politics and in the media. Stigma is fuelled by ignorance so in educating people as to the reality of mental illness we can help to combat some of the stereotypes levelled at those who are living with depression or anxiety, or other mental disorders.

Fighting these stereotypes is crucial – stigma not only makes life more difficult for those with mental ill health, but also prevents those with as yet undiagnosed mental illnesses from getting the treatment they need.

A word too about the way Trott’s illness has been presented, as a “long-standing stress condition” or “stress related illness”. Similar terms were used a few years ago when referring to English cricketer Marcus Trescothick, who was actually diagnosed with severe depression. Indeed, terms like ‘stress related condition’ only ever seem to be used as a kind of cover description for a mental health problem. After all, mouth ulcers, headaches and asthma can all be seen as conditions that can be related to stress.

These euphemisms are dangerous as, impenetrable and evasive as they are, they have the effect of shutting down any debate about mental illness. They are so devoid of any real meaning that they prohibit further discussion, thus reinforcing the status of mental illness as a taboo subject.
Of course, it would be wrong to speculate on the exact nature of Jonathan Trott’s illness and we must make it clear that we don’t know if he has had any kind of official diagnosis. We also hope that he is receiving the support he needs to enable him to recover. But the fact remains that we are still living in a culture where some see mental illness as something best kept hidden rather than treated.

Recent blogs by Toby Williamson

• Life expectancy and loneliness in later life - visually challenged policy making? - 5 March 2014
• Debating dementia diagnosis – detecting differences - 22 November 2013
• Is being old a mental health problem? - 8 October 2013
• Dementia and GPS tracking - 9 May 2013
• For people with dementia (and everyone else) there needs to be such a thing as society - 19 April 2013