Depression is in the news quite a lot these days. Medical and psychological researchers (and news outlets) are focusing a great deal of attention on depression, and it seems that every week brings a new story about what does and doesn’t work for depression.
This is great; it’s a positive movement that is helping to make depression more of an everyday topic (instead of a hidden shame). However, many media figures report on research they don’t understand very well, and many lump all depression into one category, as if mild depression and bipolar depression are similar things. Or as if major depression can be treated in the same way atypical depression or postpartum depression should be. A great deal of the current news about the ineffectiveness of antidepressants isn’t taking into account the different forms of depression and the different treatments required.
In The Language of Emotions, I focus on situational depression, which is the situation-related low mood most of us have experienced. It’s not a disease state, as the more serious forms of depression are, and it’s usually amenable to all manner of intervention (including placebo) if you catch it early; however, if left untreated, situational depression can lead to more serious depressive disorders.
What I don’t see in this media flurry is people asking questions about why so many of us are situationally depressed. Last month, I retweeted this important public health message from Twitter user Where We At (@picklefight):
Before you diagnose yourself with depression and low self esteem, first make sure you are not, in fact, just surrounded by assholes.
Hah!
Where We At is silly and arch, but she’s got a serous point: When we’re depressed, we often turn inward and blame ourselves, but depression is not simply a low mood that arises from within. Sometimes, depression is a perfectly reasonable response to trouble in your life; depression is often an important signal about real issues that impede or disturb you. In my book, I call depression Ingenious Stagnation:
There is also a lot of shame being thrown around. Amy and Anders are of course being publicly shamed, but so are fans who suggest that Amy was not merely an addict, but also a brilliant musical talent. The shame-throwers’ position is that if we admire Amy for her talent, we are therefore glorifying her substance abuse — which they assert is not a disease, but a choice. The shamers want us to know that Amy had choices, but made terrible, unforgivable decisions and should be publicly mocked and demeaned — so that others (mostly children, I think) won’t get the idea that drug abuse is a romantic and artistic activity.
But I’d say that the Norwegian situation was a shock not just because it was a devastating catastrophe, but because Norway seemed to be a functional and mellow place, or so we thought. Violent fundamentalist Christians? Isn’t Norway rather calm and secular? Violent right-wing political groups? Aren’t Scandinavian countries more politically advanced than that? Violent anti-Muslim hysteria? What? Youth camps for the children of a political party, what? The Norwegian tragedy was so much to take in, and the early hysteria about Islamic extremists being responsible really spun the story. So it’s easy to understand why some people focused on Amy Winehouse at first. There’s no shame in it; it’s just what happened.
Get ready for fun, laughter, singing, Emotion Theater, a Grief Ritual, a Shadow Walk, and the chance to spend a relaxing week with fellow empaths and speak openly about emotions!
Awakening Your Emotional Genius: An Empathic Sleepover Camp with Karla McLaren at
From its healthy, flowing state (where it is your instincts and your intuition), your fear is evoked into what I call its mood state (this is when most of us can 