The 'M' word

Mental health has been at the forefront of the media this last week, following the tragic Germanwings plane that was likely deliberately crashed by the co-pilot. The media is most interested in mental health when it involves celebrity or violence. I watched last week as the story unfolded from the initial reports of a tragic crash, to the slow realisation that this was not a technical error or human failure but a deliberate action of one man. And that is where the reports start to change, you can almost sense the excitement of the journalists uncovering pieces of an individuals life and medical reports, theorising and inferring where there was no solid information. The headlines included "Why was he allowed to fly?" and "Madman in the cockpit". A not very measured response from the media, attaching immediately to the possible diagnosis of depression, which in the first days referred to a period of time six years previously. Mental health violence, the "madman", the secret psychopath makes a good story, which is still being added to each day. And yet despite the revelation that the co-pilot may also have had eyesight problems, it is his depression and mental illness that continues to hold the attention of the media. I am certainly not going to deny that violence is sometimes a consequence of mental illness, but the data shows that a very small percentage (7.5%) of crime committed by people with mental illness is a direct result of the mental illness In fact people with mental illness are far more likely to be a victim of violence than a perpetrator. However due to media coverage of the mentally ill as crazed killers and out of control psychopaths, people typically associate random, unexplained violence with mental illness. Heather Stuart showed that people most fear violence that is "random, senseless and unpredictable" and they would prefer to know that a crime was committed as part of a robbery, which they can make sense of, than as a result of someone with a psychotic illness. Add to this a study that shows that the each widely publicised attack involving someone will mental health increases the public's real social distancing from mental illness, in other words and increase in stigma (Angermeyer and Matschinger in Stuart Apart from my love of studies and evidence this reassures me then that this stigma, this increase in discrimination is real, and only increases with the kind of media coverage experienced this week. I am certainly not suggesting that mental illness did not play a part in the actions of the co-pilot and understand the need to find answers and explanations for such tragic events. But it must be measured against the quick to blame mental illness attitude- he must have been mentally ill- must have? Must all inexplicable actions be written off as mental illness? The truth is most people with mental health problems are only of danger to themselves. The mentally ill are you teachers, police officers, nurses, train drivers, shop assistants, cleaners and care workers. As Alistair Campbell eloquently said this week

We may never fully understand why Lubitz crashed flight 4U9525. Despite that, the assumption that his mental health was the sole reason 149 others died will do nothing to diminish the stigma attached to mental health problems...if he had cancer we wouldn't be blaming that and banning people with cancer from working

What we need to do is demystify mental illness, not as a caricature of the psychopath or crazed killer, but as a very common, sometimes scary illness that can be very effectively treated. Because if the media demonise it as something that leads only to inexplicable tragedy, then less people will step forward and potentially receive treatment. I have Bipolar disorder, a sometimes psychotic illness, I'm a little bit strange but I'm not a danger to anyone.