Abigail Shrier (Swift Press)
MUCH has been written about rising rates of mental health problems in children and teenagers, particularly in the US, with many possible explanations proposed. In , US journalist Abigail Shrier offers a bold hypothesis: this crisis is being perpetuated by the very measures supposed to counter it 鈥� used by families, schools and, especially, professionals.
For Shrier, the problems start with the many ways modern child-rearing differs from that of previous generations. Much of this difference is so-called helicopter parenting, when parents micromanage their children鈥檚 lives to ensure they are constantly mentally and physically nurtured.
Advertisement
In the past, children didn鈥檛 spend a large part of the day being taxied from one stimulating activity to another, but were left to get bored, make up games and rub along with the local kids, being socialised in the process. Their squabbles and scrapes helped foster resilience and turn them into functioning adults, she writes.
Another of Shrier鈥檚 targets is the vogue for 鈥済entle parenting鈥�. Previous generations 鈥渃orrected and punished their way through childrearing鈥�. Today we talk to our kids in the language of therapists, which Shrier satirises as: 鈥淪ammy, I see that you鈥檙e feeling frustrated. Is there a way you could express your frustration without biting your sister?鈥� Small wonder if children cannot cope when they have to face the outside world鈥檚 lower tolerance for their tantrums.
In fact, therapy-speak (and therapy-think) are also Shrier鈥檚 targets, part of what she sees as the growing, malign influence of the mental health industry on family and school life. Children are regularly subjected to mental health screening tests, which could cause the problems they are meant to prevent, she writes.
In one example that may shock parents, Shrier recounts how, when she took her 12-year-old to the doctor with a stomach ache, he was asked questions such as whether he ever felt his family would be better off if he were dead. US schools also routinely use such surveys to ask children if they think of cutting or burning themselves. No one seems to consider the potential for putting ideas in their heads.
Shrier鈥檚 case is cogent but not watertight. Her research seems to consist of interviews with families and the mental health professionals who agree with her 鈥� scientific literature, not so much.
For some, Shrier鈥檚 argument will amount to 鈥減ill shaming鈥�, for instance in her description of a family who tackled their son鈥檚 ADHD by giving him strict routines and chores, not drugs.
At the start of the book, Shrier says she isn鈥檛 against medication for those with profound mental illness, just for a second cohort, now far larger: 鈥渢he worriers, the fearful, the lonely鈥� They go looking for diagnoses to explain the way they feel. They think they鈥檝e found 鈥榠t鈥� but the 鈥榠t鈥� is always shifting.鈥�
The trouble is, how can parents know if their troubled child is in the first group or the second? For cynics, it may be tempting to dismiss Bad Therapy as another version of the claims that Gen Z are 鈥渟nowflakes鈥�. However, US teens have never had so many mental health diagnoses, so much therapy and so much psychoactive medication. Whatever is causing their problems, it seems to be getting worse. If only a tenth of what Shrier writes is correct, it would be profoundly alarming.
The rising rates of mental health problems may be most pronounced in the US, but they are also worrying in other countries, such as the UK and Australia. Parents and anyone with an interest in young people鈥檚 welfare should read this book 鈥� preferably with an open mind.
