There is a not uncommon practice among my peers, which is to justify behavior in the name of mental health. I firmly believe that mental health is something that’s very important, and that ignoring it can lead to massively detrimental consequences. I think that mental health is an integral part of personhood, whatever that sentence actually means. I also want to clarify that my use of “mental health” in this essay does not refer to mental health in a psychiatric sense. Clearly, that is a realm of extremity in this subject matter that I, a non-professional, am not ready to make statements on. I mean to use “mental health” in its common or garden sense. I am not, however, saying that there is a clear distinction between the two, or anything that demarks them. I shall simply deal with generalities. What I find a little baffling and unsettling is that people often use the excuse of mental health simply as that- an excuse. It seems that some individuals, when faced with a challenging situation that they find personally uncomfortable or difficult to navigate, will find the easiest way out and say that it’s for reasons having to do with mental health. I take issue with this. I think that mental health is something that one ought to consider when they are facing situations that may cause them mental distress. But my perception of these people in their aforementioned situations don’t seem to be doing that. They seem to be resigned to the belief that any amount of mental distress past a certain threshold is bad for them, and therefore is to be avoided. They are unwilling to let themselves be challenged in meaningful, growth encouraging ways, and I honestly think that they are suffering for it.
One theme that I think represents my argument rather well is that of health vs resiliency. Let’s consider an analogy. Imagine a person sitting at home, considering going on a jog. Before them are three choices. First, they could not go for a run. Second they could go for a jog, but at a pace where they won’t really get out of breath, and their muscles won’t be sore the next day. Third, they could go for a jog and really push themselves. They’d soak their shirt in sweat and their legs would protest when they got out of bed the next day. I think that it’s obvious that the person wouldn’t get any stronger if they took the first option. I think it’s also obvious that the person would get stronger if they took the second option, but not as strong as if they took the third. A person who consistently takes the second option would be left in the dust over time progress-wise compared to someone who consistently takes the third. Does this mean that the third option is better than the second one? Maybe, maybe not. Perhaps they’re running for different reasons that are undefined in the parameters of this hypothetical. I will, however, posit that the third option is better than the second at improving the strength and health of our imaginary person. Sure, we recognize that the person is going to have to leave his or her comfort zone. They’re going to have to challenge himself or herself in ways that he or she may find to be uncomfortable, or even distressful, but when presented in this context, I think that it’s not to challenging to see that simply because something is uncomfortable or causes distress does not make it an ultimately compelling reason not to do it. Yes, there will be times when this person is feeling sore, or tired, or weaker. There will be times when they maybe get shin splints or an ingrown toenail. They’ll probably even face an injury every now and then. There is also a scenario where this person pushes himself or herself too hard, and ends up having to stop for a while and recover. These are all adverse setbacks that would seem to indicate retrograde progress, but we know that this is not truly the case.
When people say they’re doing something for their mental health, the question that pops into my mind is “what about their mental resiliency?” What about challenging themselves so they can learn to get up again and bounce back? What about pushing themselves to the boundaries of exhaustion so they can recharge and be even stronger than before? I think that when it comes to mental distress, many people are not choosing between the danger of overtraining or injury and training at an appropriate and productive pace, to revive the jogger analogy. They are choosing between option two and three, or option one and three. They see the potential distress that seems looming and imminent should they endeavor to push themselves, and they see the dangers of risking injury, and the discomfort of the ingrown toenails and sweat drenched chafing, and they find themselves overwhelmed. So they shut down and sit down on the couch. And like the jogger, I think that in the name of health, they forsake it.
