This post is a joint effort with Cassie Hampden, a postgraduate student in psychology.
One of the issues raised in the Henson brouhaha is the issue of the consent of the children modelling for the photographs, with one judge arguing whether it was really possible for consent to be granted and speculating about the possibility of a lawsuit if a model, later in life, regrets being photographed naked as a teenager.
In that context, a recent story on the 7.30 Report provides a rather interesting counterpoint. It’s a feel-good story about a 17-year-old girl, from a working-class background in a working-class Victorian town, who overcame both these barriers and a battle with anorexia and depression to win a national “Brain Bee” – essentially, a neurology quiz contest for later-year high school students. Through this success, she’s had the opportunity to do work experience at the Howard Florey Institute at Melbourne University, and travel to Montreal for the world final of the contest.
This is a wonderful achievement; and no doubt the horizons opened to her will lead in many interesting directions. But the way her story was told was unsettling on several levels.
Firstly, the journalist seems to have corralled the story into the Billy Elliot (Blackboard Jungle/Educating Rita etc. etc. etc.) narrative; that of the poor country kid from a family of ‘battlers’, pulled out of the gutter by a dedicated teacher who recognizes her extraordinary gifts. Predictably, this quickly degenerates into a turgid, self-defeating exercise in identity politics that, rather than emphasising the young woman’s achievements, subtly holds her, her family, and fellow Brain Bee-ers up to ridicule. The report featured many unsupported (and possibly unsupportable) assertions about the parentage of her rivals (“doctors’ sons” and so forth), and pigeonholed her family as “fish-and-chip shop owners”, a gross oversimplification that just happened to fit the storyline. It was as if educated, middle-class, inner-city viewers were invited to picture the state of the the family’s living room; a wicker basket laden with back issues of Peopleand a bookcase completely bereft except for a dusty bottle of Baitz’s Cherry Liqueur and copy of Max Walker’s How to Hypnotise Chooks. Not all small-town shop owners are ignorant bumpkins.
But that’s by the by. The really interesting – and unsettling – thing about this story was the extended discussion of the young woman’s struggle with mental illness – specifically, anorexia and depression. Obviously, it’s wonderful that she is winning her battle with the darker corners of her psyche. And she may want well have wanted to tell the whole world about it; full disclosure of one’s mental illness seems to be all the rage these days. And from a public health point of view, what could diminish the stigma attached to mental illness more than a bright, attractive young woman appearing on national television and revealing her psychiatric history in the context of an exceptional personal achievement? But has she, the journalist and her parents really thought through, and fully understood, the consequences of the first Google hits for her name being about her teenage battle with mental illness? (Obviously, this post inevitably draws more attention to it, but there’s more than enough Google hits there that this one won’t significantly add to the risk.) Her family and current school are undoubtedly very supportive. Future employers, prospective partners, and so on may not be; even if they are, she may not want to be defined by the mental illness she suffered as a teenager.
Given the young woman’s demonstrated aptitude for neuroscience and psychology, it is not inconceivable that she may wish to pursue a career in this area. Ironically, this may be where her googlability as ‘mentally ill teenager’ will be of most concern. While not necessarily obvious to the general public, there is a particular stigma attached by the mental health professions to a pattern of emotional disturbance often experienced by young women, where they periodically tick the boxes for a variety of mood, anxiety and eating disorders in the context of ongoing difficulties with regulating emotions and relationships. It often seems to occur as a consequence of some kind of drawn-out interpersonal trauma, which might be anything from schoolyard bullying (which this young woman experienced) to exposure to domestic violence or long-term physical, sexual and emotional abuse.
There are a variety of ways in which mental health professionals can frame this pattern of disturbance, and needless to say, the way it is framed can have significant implications for how the young woman is treated. Having had her problems conceptualised as “depression” and “anorexia”, she has hopefully received respectful and appropriate treatment, probably therapy combined with some kind of medication, and underpinned by the assumption that she is a decent, worthwhile person, deserving and appreciative of help and with a bright future ahead of her.
However, as Meera Atkinson points out in her beautifully written Griffith Review piece on the emotional difficulties she experienced as a result of family violence, the stamps that can accumulate on a young woman’s psychiatric passport are often fatalistic and frankly pejorative: “drama queen, borderline personality disorder, self-destructive, hysteric, depressive, neurotic, phobic and hypochondriac”. This flexibility in labelling reflects the somewhat problematic distinction that psychiatrists make between ‘Axis I’ disorders (e.g. depression, anorexia; purportedly ‘real’ diseases that befall you through no fault of your own and can feasibly be treated) and ‘Axis II’ disorders (e.g. ‘borderline’ personality disorder; ingrained, incurable, and implying that this is the kind of attention-seeking, ‘rotten to the core’ person you are). While on the face of it, Axis II personality disorders refer to well-defined patterns of behaviour that can cause significant distress to their sufferers, all too often they are used as “sophisticated insults” whose main purpose is to ‘red flag’ patients to other clinicians as being manipulative, argumentative, difficult to treat, or a potential source of false allegations of professional misconduct.
As noted, the stigma attached to some types of female distress is not necessarily shared by the public at large (although, in the US, the diagnosis ‘borderline personality disorder’ is regularly deployed by local equivalents of the Black Shirts to discredit women involved in divorce and custody battles). But given that this young woman might feasibly seek an career in neuroscience, clinical psychology or an allied profession, she could find her youthful disclosures resurrected and brought back to bite her, should she ever become embroiled in the internecine squabbling, power struggles and personality clashes that tend to characterise such fields (well, any field, really).
And so, let us contrast the revelations of Bill Henson’s model with that of the subject of the report. One, whose identity will remain forever anonymous unless she chooses to reveal it, has had her breasts exposed to the world, but is unlikely to be the target of any future stigma or moral censure. By contrast, the other – also under-age – has had her internal demons revealed in such a way that they will be forever easily found by anyone with the wit to use Google. The first has Prime Ministers up in arms. The second – which raises at least as many issues of consent and future harm – is just fine with everyone, it seems.
Yes, and mummy bloggers had better watch out too! All those embarrassing photos and personal revelations they disclose about their children, which those children cannot possibly have consented to, as the little darlings are still pre-verbal and incontinent, as the dear mummy bloggers constantly attest…
I kind-of see your point Robert. But I have to warn you that IMHO to link this one with Henson puts you perilously close to nomination for an Agincourt Award. (*ooh, harsh!*)
Robert and Cassie Australia is rife with such irrational double standards. One only has to look at the way Bindi Irwin has been shamelessly exploited following her father’s death and made to perform all over the world like a trained seal … not only with no expressions of concern from Teh Authorities but with gushing approval from our last prime minister. In justification one hears constantly that she is wise beyond her years and has made an informed choice and is surrounded by adults who care only for her and other nauseating self-serving nonsense.
When it comes to normative standards concerning the rights of children and the responsibilities of their parents, inconsistencies and hysteria are par for the course in our society.
I’m unsubscribing from this website.
I followed up on Quinn’s Brain Bee comp in Montreal and found “Lessons in neuroscience: theory meets reality in the back seat of a taxi” http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=bc122e1e-c5f2-4bf5-a309-16d426a9781d
In this piece a taxi driver who had trained as a doctor at home in New Delhi and practised medicine in Germany and Vienna before coming to Canada 15 years earlier asks two of the contestant some tough questions as he drives them to the venue. They wonder “Why are you driving a taxi? How come you aren’t practising?”
“It is very difficult to get accredited. I have passed the exams here, but there are not many positions for interns who have trained elsewhere,” the cabbie said with the resigned air of a middle-aged man who no longer expects opportunity to knock.
As they step out of his taxi, he wished the girls luck.
Sundaram was troubled.
‘It’s terrible that he can’t practise after training for so long.”
It seems there are some things that even the smartest teenagers can’t quite fathom….
From what I could gather Quinn was in the final 4 but was not the winner.
Far more embarrasing but fortunately ungooglable.
A disturbing post Robert. Presumably she should bury her past and never mention it again? All too late now obviously. However, if future partners or employers are going to discriminate against her because of her childhood psychological issues (that she has bravely overcome) then I’d suggest that’s their loss and she’s better off without them.
You seem to be validating the social stigma of mental illness while at the same time decrying it. The stigma attached to mental illness is obviously very real in society and we’re quite pychzoid about it, but the antidote for such stimga is never going to be brought about through our being embarrassed about another’s revelations. Indeed such reactions only serve to compound it.
“…from a working-class background in a working-class Victorian town, who overcame both these barriers and a battle with anorexia and depression to win a national “Brain Bee” – essentially, a neurology quiz contest for later-year high school students.”
WTF
Adrian: if you’re reading this to imply that we think that “working class” implies dumb we’ve really not expressed ourselves well.
Ken Lovell:
And how is this different from sticking a child in a room full of other children and expecting them to perform like a ‘trained seal’?
I think the question is: where is the line between an abnormal childhood and an abusive one?
I agree with Caroline and Mercurius.
I don’t think there is anything to be gained by extending arguments about shielding children from exploitation to absurd extremes. Even the injunction “thou shalt not kill” will yield paradoxical and absurd results when applied rigidly and without reference to the context.
Kay Redfield Jamison wrote a memoir documenting her bipolar disorder. She is Professor of Psychiatry at John Hopkins Medical School and an acknowledged academic expert in Bipolar Disorder. Quinn walks in the footsteps of others and thankfully, they have made it a little easier for her to achieve her goals.
It’s hardly surprising that the media imposed such a narrative and resorted to stereotype to tell the ‘feel good’ story. It’s in the nature of mass media to do this sort of thing for the very simple reason that every nuance and complexity loses ‘em audience share. Every television journalist who sincerely wants to labour their vocation must struggle and compromise with the lowest common denominator realities of the marketplace.
>
As for the future consequences of her ‘coming out’ well live and learn. She’s 17, not old enough to vote but old enough to know that actions have consequences. The Henson thing’s reminded me how frustrating it was when as a teenager I was asumed incompetant in exercising my own agency. It was simply not true. And hell yeah I made mistakes – hasta la vista.
I’ve got a comment stuck in moderation? If it’s the swearing in the first sentence, feel free to delete. Cheers,
patrickg, I can’t find any comment from you – unfortunately the spaminator is having one of its off days and it’s possible someone might have deleted it along with the actual spam by mistake. Sorry!
No probs Mark; much as already been said anyways.
I don’t think this post hasn’t been really thought through; I think the link is a bit arbitrary, and I would worry about somebody being silent about having (and/or overcoming) a disability for fear of censure; that’s never to be encouraged.
Oh well, seems like this one’s not real popular…
Just some observations: just because we’d all like mental health issues to be stigma-free, doesn’t mean they are. And, like we said, there are some issues within the mental health professions that are very real (and widely recorded in the literature) that haven’t attracted much attention outside it.
Having met Quinn and working with the 7:30pm Report to produce the story on her achievements I would like to make two points.
Firstly, Quinn spent one week at the Howard Florey Institute working with a number of different neuroscientists. All were extremely impressed with her maturity and her ability to understand the complexities of the brain. The Florey’s Director was also very impressed by Quinn. Such support from Australia’s leading brain research institute means that should Quinn decide to one day undertake postgraduate studies or seek employment in neuroscience, the Florey would welcome her. To say that by talking about her battle with a annorexia and depression on TV would have a negative impact on her neuroscience career prospects is pure nonsense.
Secondly, Quinn and her family were made fully aware of the ramifications of talking on TV about her battle with annorexia and depression. Quinn was not ashamed of her experience with mental illness and believed that by sharing her story she may be able to help other girls going through similar problems.
Quinn is an exceptional young woman. We need more talented people like Quinn taking an interest in neuroscience research as it is these people who will help find the answers to the devastating brain disorders that affect billions of people world-wide.
MR: thanks for your comment. And, in case it hasn’t been made abundantly clear, good on Quinn.
But I think you may be sugarcoating some of the less attractive attitudes in the mental health professions towards some diagnoses over others. Maybe it’s less pronounced at the neuroscience end of the profession.
“But I think you may be sugarcoating some of the less attractive attitudes in the mental health professions towards some diagnoses over others. Maybe it’s less pronounced at the neuroscience end of the profession.”
Interesting. Had dinner last week with a friend who does psych assessments in regional Victoria and we sort of touched on this issue. I think you have a valid point. Part of the problem is our poor level of understanding of psych issues and chronic underfunding in all areas of mental health. I think the workers at the coal face are stressed and traumatised and often end up batty themselves.
Unfortunately much of today’s left intelligentsia is more interested in narrowly bourgeois issues like arts funding rather than bread and butter issues like mental health, which disproportionately impacts the poor. Of course the right intelligentsia couldn’t give a stuff. As mental health isn’t a vote winner and the elites largely ignore it, the prognosis is very poor indeed.