You do not have to be rich to have a breakdown

[UndertheCedartree]

I heard this recently - you have to be rich to have a breakdown. Meaning that those who are not wealthy have to 'just get on with it.' They can't have a mental breakdown as they have to work etc.

I really disagree with this. I had a serious mental breakdown and I can assure people that psychiatric hospitals are not full of wealthy people. I think this narrative is really dangerous as it makes people think they 'don't have time' to look after their mental health and the trouble is this then means a serious breakdown is more likely and at that point it is really not a choice. When you get sectioned you don't get a choice as to if you 'want' to have a breakdown or not as you need to work.

I think this also disproportionately affects women as there is the added narrative that you have to 'just get on with it' with the home and children. The truth is there are many mothers in hospital like I was.

I encourage people to choose to look after their mental health as otherwise you may end up being forced to look after it. Obviously, I'm not saying that you can always prevent these things but early intervention seems to have better outcomes.

I get exactly what you are saying. People on this forum say things like "I can't afford a breakdown" either. The thing is, it can get to a point and you just can't go on. You might lose your home, your children, everything.

Yes, that's true people don't always get the help they need but clearly that person was obviously not 'getting on with it'. They did not need to say anything. At a certain level of mental illness the person would not necessarily say anything as would have often lost insight, they just wouldn't be able to hide their symptoms. Once again, I'm not saying someone can't be very unwell without hitting this point, but hospitals are full of people who don't need to say anything. You get to a point of no return. And yes, we need far more beds.

I agree.

Exactly that. For someone they may not be able to afford a breakdown but may have one anyway. I don't think a lot of people really understand how extreme it can get. I didn't before my breakdown.

I've never heard that but it does upset me when people say how bad their breakdown/anxiety/depression is but they "just have to get on with it." Imo and my experience, when it's that bad you really can't just keep going. The body breaks and you stop functioning as you were.

Mental Breakdown is not a proper medical term: it’s a layman’s term for all sorts of things and is best avoided as it’s so vague.

I have worked as a consultant psychiatrist for over 25y. I have never once used the term ‘breakdown’ as it’s a lay and non-clinical term. People use it to describe their version of a mental health collapse. Whatever they want to describe it as is fine by me of course.

Please could you tell us what is included in a mental collapse?

I think it happens to poorer people more often because they can’t afford to seek intervention earlier on before they reach crisis. Someone with financial security could pay for a counsellor that a poorer person needs to wait for an NHS referral for a crappy 6 sessions. The wealthy can continue that therapy as needed. A poor individual cannot take the time off necessary to recover from burn out because their sick pay is only a few weeks. The wealthy don’t have to worry about the financial implications of taking the time to recover at an earlier stage.

this is applicable to both mental and physical health in the lower paid and less financially secure. Wealth gives you access to support that lower classes can only dream of

I guess I have had a breakdown all my life then not being able to hold a job because of mental exhaustion?

Yes, at the point of breakdown you just can't function. I think people use 'breakdown' when it really isn't appropriate. It then makes others feel they have to keep going until they may end up pushing themselves to a breakdown. I've heard people claim to have had '2 breakdowns this week' which really minimises the lived experiences of those who have experienced a breakdown/breakdowns. It is like when people say they have OCD because they like a tidy house.

It is an informal term but certainly used by some clinicians.

Imo, that is not a breakdown if you can do other things like sleep, eat etc. If you had a breakdown all your life you'd be dead.

Agreed.

Exactly. So the op is incorrect saying mental break down has one agreed definition.

Yes. For someone a breakdown will mean psychosis and detention under the MHA. For someone else it will mean debilitating panic attacks and a month off work. I am not going to police lay language.

I have never heard of anyone in a professional capacity say "breakdown". It has been "in crisis".
I think people hear the word breakdown and see some point that can be pinned down where someone just "lost it". MH illness does not happen like that. It creeps up on you, and sometimes you don't even know it yourself.
I have been in crisis and slept and ate ok... but everything else went to shit.

Except I never said that. That was what you said in your demand for me to provide a definition agreed across the whole of the UK or something. As I had already said 'mental breakdown' is not a diagnosis.

I agree mental illness creeps up on you. But as many of us described there is a point where you just break and everything goes to shit. At that point there is no 'carrying on'. It is something lots of people within the hospital system experience and recognise. We were spoken to about it in hospital in one of the groups.

Oh, I agree. I also do not understand the whole "I can't afford to have a breakdown"... like having any sort of commitments, work or financial, can stop one.
If you do not make time for your wellness, you will be forced to make time for your illness.

What word would you use to describe when someone is unable to carry out any activities of living? When they cannot mask any longer? That is what myself and peers would call a breakdown. It's a very common experience so maybe we need a more accurate term but that is what we and our clinicians called it.

That phrase is a better way of saying what I have been trying to say! Spot on!

What are you disagreeing with me about then, if not the definition?

Your post show you have a narrow definition of it in your mind and are not flexible to how others might define it, as can be seen from your quotes:

“Personally, I think if you can still work and look after children and function and aren’t being hospitalised you aren’t maybe as unwell as you think.”

“I wish people wouldn’t use breakdown in that way though as it really isn’t helpful or empathetic to those suffering severely.”

“Perhaps most people don’t really understand what it is like to be so mentally unwell that you need to be hospitalised sometimes for years and it really isn’t something people choose…”

”…there are definitely some people who claim to be most severely unwell but are still able to work, look after children etc. I feel that is an insult to the experience of those who are locked in hospitals unable to do anything and I don’t think it helps with awareness”

If you’re not arguing with me about the definition, then what is your disagreement with what I have said?

As far as I remember I disagreed that it was necessarily possible to mask indefinitely or at the point a person has what many of us refer to as a 'breakdown'. Perhaps this usage is not as universal as I thought. I was in hospital for a long time so have a lot of 'hospital' friends. It was the term used by the clinicians too but maybe that was a common experience among myself and my peers. But what I was referring to was the point at which you cannot function atall and can no longer mask. My point being that I feel it is a dangerous narrative that someone can 'just get on with it' indefinitely because as far as I'm concerned it is not a given and a risky practice.

Right, you had completely misunderstood my posts then.

Thank you for clarifying and finally agreeing that your definition is not an agreed universal one.