Tony Blair says we need a national conversation about MH as its costing too much

[B0xes]

Tony Blair said recently on Jimmy's Jobs of the Future Podcast (clip available on youtube) that we need to have a national conversation about mental health. Why are we spending so much on it. Why are people self diagnosing. He believes people are being encouraged to view everyday challenges we all face as mental health issues.

Is he being unreasonable? In one sense, I'm inclined to agree to an extent, in the other, I believe he led the charge for so many of the social changes that have made us less resilient and many of these issues are due to individualism which led to atomisation and loneliness and being encouraged to see the market as the entity that fulfills our needs rather than strong families and robust social networks.

YABU - Blair can do one.

YANBU - He might have a point

I think that in MOST cases (with some exceptions) this is not true. Because the terms 'anxiety' and 'depression' are used both for normal human emotions and for disorders, some people have the idea that people are getting medical diagnoses just for being a bit worried or sad at times. No, there are definite disorders which are not just ordinary negative emotions. I'm not
saying that no one EVER magnifies ordinary emotions into disorders, just as some people may claim to have a fatal illness when they've just got a slight cold or headache, but neither is usual, and it doesn't mean that people with actual mental illnesses are just spoilt brats who don't deserve any help or accommodation.

Oh yes. That's what caused it all. Come on. People who have mental health difficulties now are concerned about an illegal war, and the buy to let market??

Sorry I don't understand your reply. Are you making fun of one of my previous replies? That's the only thing I think this might be?

Praise the Lord!

I do wish that you would ignore me. I realise that this will be a shock, but people are entitled to disagree and I have done with another poster. Her childish tone offended me more than the circumstances tbh, I've not heard some of those pharses used by over 15s. Life goes on. Certainly not on the wind up, we all have different views to which we are entitled and I've made mine very clear.

Totally agree. Mental health services are frankly non-existent on the NHS. So not sure who's 'costing us too much' when there are no services to access.

To get anywhere near adequate care, people - who are already paying into the NHS - are forced to go private, thus paying thousands via health insurance and, when that runs out, their own hard-earned cash.

He's got a bloody cheek.

I have to say some of this thread puts me in mind of that Monty Python sketch - "t'is but a flesh wound".

There is definitely a conversation to be had about the state of mental health, but approaching it as an economic issue says everything about what is wrong with modern life. It's such a complex big picture issue.

My own experience has been that struggling with bereavement (just as one examplel) and significant negative knock on effects, has been met with a range of suggestions and opinions, and alot of that has been people backing away and suggesting medication, therapy and that my reaction points to there being "something wrong with me" beyond the difficulty of adjusting to my entire life and future being turned upside down. Which has lead me to lose alot of confidence in myself and in the world around me.

I got six - graciously extended to eight - weeks of "Steps to Well-being" for an hour, on the phone, with a young sounding girl who basically was only able to listen and say "Gosh, that is alot". At the end she asked if it had helped, and I had to say that truthfully all it meant was I offloaded to a stranger instead of burdening friends or family, because this latest thing was on top of multiple other stressful situations and trying to unpick that for an hour over 8 weeks was a bit futile. No therapeutic solutions or strategies were suggested beyond the basics I was doing anyway.

I'm definitely "not right" but I don't know if my entire life of clusterfucks is my own fault, undiagnosed ADHD, normal reaction to abnormal events or mind control by aliens, or how to address it at my age. I just want to live normally but my normal was brutally denied to me three tears ago and toughing it out has left me isolated, jobless and penniless.

And I'm a mild case, and I see people struggling with so much more, and the attitudes displayed by some regarding anyone who admits that actually no, they need time out or bust, or have severe conditions, makes me wish I could just dissappear because it amplifies my feelings of shame, fear, embarrassment and uselessness.

I'm lucky I have experienced good times, and really feel for younger people who haven't, but then feeling as though I'm too old to start again, and fearing building something new for myself only to lose it yet again overwhelms me.

I present with dark humour, unhealthy coping mechanisms and surviving out of spite and I try to count my blessings but it feels so hollow when rationally or not I feel written off and rejected by society at large.

So I'll fight for the under dog and try to see the bigger picture. It might be futile, but it keeps me from completely disappearing up my own void. And I know not everyone had that luxury.

So solidarity with those struggling - I hope we can all hang in there somehow.

to fully fund all the services a modern society needs, we need a better economic model than capitalism

They're declaring themselves ill though and acting as though they're ill (apart from making tic toks and boasting about it on sm). Apparently you don't need an official diagnosis now, as it's 'their truth' and nobody can argue with them because that's bullying.

We should probably consider one very simple and completely overlooked fix. Vitamin d, it should be supplied to every citizen and we need an educational campaign on how vital it is for all health systems (especially mental health)

We’re not understanding just how little vitamin d we naturally get in this country, or acting on it. I can only imagine the impact that would have just on nhs spending alone.

There have always been old people and society has always made provision for them. Ideally we say that people should be working in order to finance their own old age housing and care costs, although we offer help to those who can't.

The issue with mental health is that that numbers seem to have exploded, and more to the point here, numbers claiming they can't work have exploded.

We can only carry so many non-workers. That's just a fact, whether or not you think it's fair. A huge explosion in people claiming support can't be sustained long term and tutting at people for pointing this out won't change that.

Like disability, which is the problem potentially in this case.

There haven't been old people in the numbers we have today though, there has been a huge explosion of old people.
Have the numbers exploded or has the stigma reduced so people no longer feel ashamed? Having to hide relatives away in asylums has been going on for a very long time. It would be fantastic if there was a way of sorting those genuinely in need of help from those that aren't but without that ability I just can't see how any civilised society to leave people so suffer (although to be fair we are already doing that as no support is available to those in need!)

There was no tutting from me by the way

The earliest age a diagnosis can be sort is age 7

I know a few August born children. Some are no different to the children who are a year older than them but some lack maturity and I can see why some of them could have ADHD

However not all children diagnosed with ADHD have ADHD as adults. I wonder how many of these children are the ones who are in the group who “outgrow” ADHD

The number of old people has CERTAINLY exploded, due to increased life expectancy. Which is a very good thing. But the problem of how to organize and pay for social care for the elderly is in fact one of the key issues for government, families and society right now.

And funding for help with mental health does not just mean benefits for those who can't work. It also means therapies and treatments that may prevent mental illness from spiralling out of control in the first place; and adjustments and adaptations to enable people to work- which is likely to mean more in-work benefits, or funding for employers to make adaptations, or both.

It should be noted that most of the comments on this thread refer just to some mentally unwell people's inability or supposed refusal to work. But there is also the issue of employers not always being keen to employ people with mental health difficulties, either out of prejudice, or out of concerns that such people may be less productive at times, or more expensive (in time or money) to employ. Maybe employers need to be given more incentives to employ people with health issues.

Yeah, in my experience it isn't these kids that lack resilience, they are usually very able.

There have been some studies that suggest that wc kids are more independent and able to transition into living alone and the work environment. That's also been my observation, and my friend who works at a university and hires students in her role has said the same thing. She can predict which kids will do well with life and work tasks - it's wc or rural kids.

The people in asylums in the past were those with illnesses like bipolar, severe depression and psychosis. These are now the people either still in modern day asylums (if condition is medication resistant), or heavily medicated with little support.

Respectfully, I don't believe that my chronic, horrifying intrusive thoughts, anxiety-induced self harm behaviours, and struggling to maintain a living space that isn't in total squalor are "humankind's default state".

I feel many people on the thread are not keeping in mind that 'mental health' is an umbrella term that covers a vast swathe of different conditions of varying severity. You only see a select part of what another person is experiencing in their daily life - If you were to meet me on the street, or see me at my place of work, then you may believe that I'm entirely fine and functional. That's only because I've learned to internalise the worst of my mental health in order to appear relatively normal, however.

Yes, there are more old people, they are also in many cases working longer as they are healthier. And it's not unlikely that we will find that we need to extend that officially, or put more responsibility on people to fund their own old age.

We know what people are living longer though and generally that's seen as a positive thing in itself.

An explosion of poor mental health is clearly not positive. And no, I don't think it has much to do with loss of stigma, with more people reporting while it's really the same amount of poor health.

I think some is that there are people who have found it is a good way to get things; some is iatrogenic harms, caused largely by current parenting and cultural infantalization of young people, and some is people being convinced they are ill when they are not. We see this kind of social contagion a lot now, for example the kids in the US, all across the country, who "caught" tourettes.

In addition, a lot of young people now seem to have the idea that if they are not feeling ok, they need to be supported, and that wasn't the case in the past. There have always been people who needed support, but it now IMO includes a lot of people who would have carried on before but feel they deserve support.

What none of them seem to get is that it isn't some abstract thing called the "government" supporting them. It's other people who are out working. There is a limit to the number of people who can be supported in this way in the population. And the ones who really need it - new mums, the elderly, severely disabled, the ill, or mentally unwell people - constitute a good sized group already. The UK Is beginning to approach the % of the population being supported that makes economists worry.

The point is these August kids don't have ADHD in higher numbers. Did you really think that could be a thing?

They are just younger than most of the others in the class, so their behaviour is differernt. The behavioural expectations of the teacher aren't appropriate.

But what is really significant is that the supposedly objective diagnoses they are getting from doctors are resulting in this disparity. It undermines the integrity diagnosis as a whole. How can these supposedly valid tests be giving kids so many more ADHD diagnoses just because they are a little younger?

It's very frustrating that it's almost impossible to discuss things like increased diagnoses, or question the validity of some, without people shouting about the fact that their diagnosis is real.

It's likea thread questioning whether fallen uterus might be a bollox diagnosis or scam, and people start berating them and shouting that some people really do get cancer and need their cervix removed.

I think people who claim ESA (not PIP as that’s as in work benefit too) whether for physical or mental issues probably fall into 2 categories.

The first category of people would be those with extreme MH issues, like extreme OCD, BPD or psychosis, and if all welfare support was withdrawn tomorrow, and they were faced with a choice of dying or working, it would inevitably be the former as they lack the capacity or capability to work. My brother has treatment resistant schizophrenia and would probably be dead or in an asylum if he lived 100 years ago.

The second category would be those with milder disease who, even though life would be much more difficult for them, and they would have reduced quality of life, they would ultimately choose to work if all welfare support was withdrawn and they faced that same choice of supporting themselves through work or dying.

I don’t doubt that life is pretty miserable if your only income is from benefits, which only just cover necessities, but I think there are probably lots of claimants now with milder issues who at the moment feel they can handle the challenges of living on a tiny budget with only most necessities covered better than the challenges that would come with work. But if those goalposts shifted, the safety net was removed and even the basics were no longer covered, I imagine they would return to work.

Ideally we would have the funds in place to support both categories of people. But we probably don’t due to the sheer numbers.

Plenty of people in the workplace claim PIP because it is paid to help with the additional costs of being disabled or having a long-term health condition. It is not an out-of-work benefit. If you cannot work because of a disability or long-term health condition you would be claiming other benefits such as Universal Credit or one of the legacy benefits.

@BooneyBeautiful you don't tend to get PIP if you are working and have a mental health difficulty like depression or anxiety. The official view is that if you manage to work, its not that bad.
Not everyone who gets PIP really needs it.

Under Blair, the rules were changed so that more people could claim disability benefits. The numbers went from less than 300k to on their way to 3m under Gordon Brown.

They have ballooned ever since because the nasty Tories were vilified for trying to row back on those changes.