Irresilience, Mental Health & The New ‘Euphoria’?
Crafting a Salacious Neurodiversity Narrative
M Night Shyamalan’s work SPLIT was from at least one perspective – acting – spectacular! James McAvoy was by all accounts utterly brilliant. His capacity to switch characters in the blink of an eye as a Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID) suffering person was quite breath-taking to watch.
Again, the acting, sublime.
As hinted, the film explores the theme of mental illness, specifically focusing on Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID), but its portrayal did generate some controversy in how DID was represented in the work.
The protagonist in the film, Kevin, (McAvoy) suffering the condition that manifests 24 distinct personalities that alternate control over his behaviour. This depiction attempts to align with diagnostic criteria outlined in the ICD-10 and DSM-5, including memory gaps and identity fragmentation caused by childhood trauma.
Whilst the film acknowledges trauma as a root cause of DID, showing Kevin’s abusive childhood as a trigger for the disorder’s development, critics argue that Split perpetuates harmful stereotypes by linking DID to violence and criminal behaviour. Kevin’s transformation into a superhuman “Beast” and his violent actions reinforce the trope of mentally ill individuals as dangerous, again, so the critics railed. Mental health experts emphasise that people with DID are more likely to be victims of abuse than perpetrators of violence, making the film’s narrative both unrealistic and potentially damaging to public perceptions of mental illness.
However, several lines in the film revealed one subtext for the film attempting to not merely destigmatise serious mental health issue but lean into the idea that somehow the Mentally Ill or the more attractive label, neurodiverse, were potentially the better people.
Some quotes from the movie include:
- “The broken are more evolved”
- We are glorious! We will no longer be afraid”
- “We are what we believe we are”
- “Only through pain can you achieve your greatness!”
- “The impure are the untouched, the unburned, the unslain. Those who have not been torn have no value in themselves and no place in this world!”
Arguably the criticisms of some clinicians over the films depiction of the DID sufferer as a violent predator, rather than victim, had clearly not yet connected with the now growing contagion of not only sanitising, but celebrated mental illness.
“DID TikTok” is a concerning outcome of this growing contagion. Whilst many serious experts question whether this profoundly controversial condition/state exists, those who do, note it is incredibly rare. And yet thousands of adolescents have self-diagnosed and perform their collective personalities to their social media sycophants – only adding to the group think and auto-suggestion contagion.
Not to be left languishing in isolation, and perhaps an inspiration for it, HBO’s series Euphoria seems to have hitched its wagon to the emerging and now portrayed, mysterious and laudable genre, of neurodiversity. The series according to most pop-culture toadies (who long for the entertainment industry and the performing arts to be more than depicters of life, but remedies or assuaging elements in it) is attempting to garner some faux credibility by dressing up serious and distressing dysfunction, as somehow cutting-edge culture.
Quizzically, instead of focusing on restoration through best practice health solutions, or answers, there now seems to be a pop-psychology reframing of these clearly psyche unravelling states as enviable. Pretending that wholeness or healing and restoration are not the goal. Rather, the attempted scaffolding of a conjured perceived ‘cool’ posture of perpetual angst that they attempt to spin into a worthwhile narrative that only self-medication by counterfeit ‘joys’ may flavour.
This, it is believed, somehow goes beyond destigmatising dysfunction and patent bio-disorder, an attempted rebadging of it as ‘special’ fails to produce this neo-transcultural posture. Ah, but that’s the best an artist can do – only portray, or pretend, mask and masquerade. Physicians and clinicians have a much bigger and better tool-kit to actually manage potential liabilities, produce change and enable growth.
Let’s keep this narrative creation in mind as we explore some of the less popular and little discussed issues around the mental health crisis emerging in our culture and particularly among our adolescents.
‘On The Spectrum’ and better for it?
The ‘spectrum’ as it has been so quaintly quipped, is that ‘thing’ we are all on – apparently?
Whilst it has been argued by some commentators, and not without some solid evidence, that some who struggle with Autism found themselves with the odd beneficial ‘side-effect’, such as pattern recognition, some empathy and even in the creation of new inventions – the movie ‘A Beautiful Mind’ on the life of Nobel Prize winner John Nash, comes to mind.
However, the experience of many a disability support worker for autistic individuals, can share a very different perspective, including my own family’s involvement with children in this space.
It’s these everyday reality checks that tend to sober one up very quickly when bumping into the champions of “neurodiversity” and the idea that autistic traits can be superpowers.
I like what Freddie DeBoer had to say in his insightful piece Mental Illness Doesn’t Make You Special noting that…
The label of neurodivergence is so vague and capacious, pretty much anything can be pulled into its orbit and made “diverse”. There’s a meme that crops up on Tumblr, TikTok and Twitter that starts with “the neurodivergent urge to…” and is immediately followed by, well, just about anything a person does. Common examples include the neurodivergent urge not to reply to an email or to order food in rather than cooking what’s in the fridge.
Not to be outdone, noted journalists are chiming in on a growing wave of re-imagining. One example can be found on the very first page of the Memoir Obsessive, Intrusive, Magical Thinking. Author and journalist, Marianne Eloise declares that she does not “have a regular brain at all”. That candid statement is clearly no longer seen as a liability in her world – not by a long shot – and so continues the contagion or poor mental health, that’s good?
This memoir catalogues Marianne’s “…experience of a dizzying variety of psychiatric conditions: OCD, anxiety, autism, ADHD, alcohol abuse, seasonal affective disorder, an eating disorder, night terrors, depression. By her own telling, Eloise has suffered a great deal from these ailments; Freddie states in his article that he believes her and wishes better for her.
However, Marianne, with a growing demographic being infected by this emerging contagion, are not merely working to destigmatise mental illness – which we all concur is a very good and necessary endeavour. They have now swung the pendulum (as all too often happens) to an unhelpful space and prefer we not think of these conditions as ailments at all. And consequently (to again quote from Freddie’s piece) is creating a concerning perspective… “that combination of self-pity and self-aggrandisement is emblematic of our contemporary understanding of mental health.”
Of course, it is no surprise to learn that Eloise is a champion of neurodivergence, and all that now strange kudos gleaning affirmations she, along with others, is attempting to promote.
Not to be out-done (and it would appear even to the most naïve of onlookers) to cash in on the inexorable pursuit of notoriety previously mentioned, Social Media platforms are increasingly punctuated by emerging groups, including growing online novelty ADHD communities where the group think is not about reparation or medication, but celebration – these social media actors portray themselves as more interesting and ‘on’ than the now referred to, ‘non-divergent norms’.
In these now very subjective and self-affirming arenas, one could argue that, by prefacing any decision with the ‘title’ neurodiverse reckoning, no conduct, behaviour or attitude can be censured. This now, along with the abandoning of any collective moral code in exchange for the subjective ethos of the ‘my truth’ mentality, now could see even sociopathy and anarchy masquerading as not deviant, but diverse?
The ‘Business’ of Mental health
In a very inciteful piece Mental health is a lucrative business, author, journalist and playwright Julie Burchill reflects on the increasing prevalence of discussions around mental health in society, arguing that it has gone from a taboo subject to an inescapable one. While acknowledging the reality of mental illness and the very beneficial need to destigmatise it, Julie suggests that many people could improve their mental state through resilience and that society’s over-cautious approach weakens individuals. This, we would argue, potential pandering can almost fit into the category of ‘soft bigotry’ and certainly does not fall into the category of empowering.
Julie critiques the commercialisation of mental health, singling out Matt Haig’s books as examples of “woe” being turned into profit. In the piece, Julie brings back into frame some of the Stoic philosophy of embracing misfortune and developing inner strength, which had served well many generations before, enabling the development of a more robust psyche.
It’s here I want to circle back to DeBeor’s article; the following excerpt stingingly appraises the toxic and fiscally predatorial undercurrent of ‘influencer’ postures and personas. Lending more and more weight to the unhealthy business of scaffolding and not rebuilding damage or even ‘infected’ psyches.
What I find tragic about those who buy into the neurodivergence narrative is that they become their illnesses. And yes, there are alternatives. Marriane Eloise and people like her seem never to consider one of the possible ways that they could have dealt with their myriad disorders: to suffer. Only to suffer. To suffer, and to feel no pressure to make suffering an identity, to not feel compelled to wrap suffering up in an Instagram-friendly manner. To accept that there is no sense in which her pain makes her deeper or more real or more beautiful than others, that in fact the pain of mental illness reliably makes us more selfish, more self-pitying, more destructive, and more pathetic. To understand that and to accept it and to quietly go about life trying to maintain peace and dignity is, I think, the best possible path for those with mental illness to walk.
But in this culture, all must be monetised, all must be aspirational, anything can be marketed. Eloise lacks the self-awareness to ask whether there’s something exploitative and ugly about turning psychological illness into fodder for soap opera and motivational posters. Again and again in her book, Eloise gins up the kind of statement on mental health that you might find in an Instagram meme, wedges it awkwardly into some prosaic story about her youth, and then skips away. At one point she mocks “Airbnb-style Live Laugh Love signage”, and I could only think, you’re writing a book filled with it.
Burchill’s article also highlights another growing ‘taboo’ subject (a legitimate concern quite easily buried by new aggressive speech codes); the challenging of what is seen as a growing trend of individuals identifying with their mental illness and using it to gain attention or avoid consequences. Demographics such as the criminal class being spared jail due to proclaimed ‘mental health’ issues – this is no more manifest than in the drug dealing/using space.
Burhcill notes, as do we, that the evidence is growing that over-protecting individuals and excessively focusing on self-care may lead to an unravelling, not strengthening of the ‘Bungee Rope’ that is resilience and the attending inability to cope with even the smallest of life’s challenges. This is not progressing mental and emotional health, only undermining it, and in doing so, ensures many more sessions are required for clinicians who are pandering to symptoms, not progressing restoration.
So, of what benefit is this emerging narrative and how is it serving our culture and its Generation Now better? Has the reckless and untethered pursuit of the desire to make every mood, urge, symptom and taste, not only ‘OK’, but exceptional, created its own now very unhealthy contagion?
A very important and incredibly large study out of Finland, published in the Journal of American Medical Association – Psychiatry in 2024 shifts those who are evidence-based informed (not culturally manipulated) into seeing the contagion predicament we have allowed to flourish.
As with physical health, the basics of aetiology remain the same in mental health management. In disease management, the priority for all clinicians is to 1) minimise susceptibility and 2) minimise exposure, to the pathogen or contagion. The question then comes; is that what is being done in this example of social-media democratisation of medicine?
The Finnish Study of Over 700,000 Adolescents investigates the potential spread of mental disorders within adolescent social networks, specifically school classes. Conducted by researchers from the University of Helsinki and other institutions, it is the largest study of its kind, involving over 700,000 ninth-grade students from 860 Finnish schools. Participants were tracked for a median of 11 years using nationwide registry data.
The following is a synopsis.
Key Findings:
- Adolescents with classmates diagnosed with mental disorders had a higher risk of receiving a similar diagnosis later in life. This association was most pronounced during the first year after exposure and was particularly strong for mood, anxiety, and eating disorders123.
- The study controlled for various confounders (e.g., parental, school-level, and area-level factors), yet the link persisted, suggesting a potential social transmission effect56.
- The researchers emphasized that this connection does not necessarily imply causation. For instance, exposure to peers seeking treatment might reduce stigma and encourage others to seek help, which could be a positive form of “contagion”17.
Methodology:
- The study utilized comprehensive Finnish registers to define social networks based on school classes, avoiding biases common in studies where participants choose their networks.
- Adolescents were followed until their first mental disorder diagnosis, emigration, death, or the end of 201916.
Implications:
- Mental disorders are a growing concern globally, especially among youth. This study underscores the importance of early intervention and preventive measures that account for peer influences13.
- The findings suggest that social environments play a critical role in mental health development and could inform strategies to address stigma and promote help-seeking behavior7. (JAMA Psychiatryin 2024 under the title “Transmission of Mental Disorders in Adolescent Peer Networks” (DOI: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38776092/)
Final ‘Diverse’ Thoughts
Building resilience into the emerging generation is not a one-dimensional process, nor is there one large ‘silver bullet’.
What is required goes beyond the silos of any one discipline or social science. All the social sciences need to work collaboratively to create, or perhaps more accurately, discover the entourage of effectual elements needed to develop strong, resilient, psychologically, emotionally and spiritually strong citizens. Attempting to assert one factor at the detriment of another, or worse, pandering to phenomenon and trying to foster a new ‘insight’ or ‘trend’ from that dysfunctional phenomenon, only exacerbates the very issues we’ve seen outlined in this commentary.
Wellness and wholeness is never found by celebrating brokenness and deficit, and simply attempting to re-task nomenclature to soften a potential ‘label’ – this is not good mental health and well-being practice. The emerging generation deserves better than this, and it is time they were empowered to find it.
Dalgarno Institute
