The more we think about depression, the more we devote
resources to curing depression, the more depression there is.
When Prozac arrived on the scene it was touted as a cure for
depression. For many people it still serves to help, but it has certainly not put
an end to depression. In fact, there seems to be more depression now than there
was in the pre-Prozac era.
Psychologist Jonathan Rottenberg says that we seem to be
losing the fight against depression:
Perhaps
the most troubling and ironic thing about the toll of depression is that it has
risen while more research and treatment resources have been poured into
combating it. In fact, depression represents an $83-billion annual burden to
the United States economy in lost productivity and increased medical expenses.
Why aren’t we winning this fight?
What’s wrong with our approach to depression? Rottenberg
suggests that we are failing to cure depression because we see it as a defect.
He recommends that we understand depression as way an organism adapts to
adversity. He sees it as a function of low mood.
He explains:
People
in a low mood blame and criticize themselves, turn situations that went wrong
over and over in their heads, and are pessimistic about the future. These
characteristics, although uncomfortable, are also potentially useful. A keen
awareness of what has gone wrong and what can go wrong again can help a person
avoid similar stressors in the future….
If we
had to find a unifying function for low mood across these diverse situations,
it would be that it functions like a cocoon, a place to pause and analyze what
has gone wrong. In this mode, we will stop what we are doing, assess the
situation, draw in others, and, if necessary, change course.
A
variety of experimental data have shown that low mood confers benefits to
thinking and decision making. That lends credence to the idea that mood is part
of a conservative behavioral guidance system that impels us toward actions that
have been successful in the past—meaning, actions that helped our ancestors to
reproduce and spread their genes. One way to appreciate why these states have
enduring value is to ponder what might happen if we had no capacity for them.
Just as animals with no capacity for anxiety were long ago gobbled up by
predators, without a capacity for sadness, we and other animals would likely
commit rash acts and repeat costly mistakes. Physical pain teaches a child to
avoid hot burners; psychic pain teaches us to navigate life’s rocky shoals with
due caution.
Of course, low mood is not the same as depression. We do
well to keep in mind Martin Seligman’s definition of depression: it's the moment
when you convince yourself that you are in a lose/lost situation and give up.
People who are depressed are not conserving their energy
while planning their next move. They are demoralized to the point where they do
not believe that they can do anything to improve their condition. There do not think that there will ever be a next move.
Rottenberg suggests that it’s a question of degree, but it
does feel like a difference of kind.
I agree that there is value in learning from failure, in
ruminating about what went wrong, but knowing why something went wrong tells you
nothing about how to make things go right. The more you ruminate about what
went wrong, the lower your morale will be. The lower your morale, the more
difficult it will be to take decisive action.
If Prof. Rottenberg tells you that ruminating
about what went wrong is a normal mental function, he might be making it
more difficult to overcome depression.
Reflection can help you to plan for the future and to figure
out how you are going to implement the plan. But, this type of reflection
involves the use of imagination. It does not involve belaboring the future. It buttresses your confidence in order to
give you the wherewithal to perform future tasks.
Depressed individuals are often assailed with
self-deprecating thoughts that tell them that they never get anything right. Thus, they believe that nothing is worth trying.
Rottenberg is suggesting that people should stop feeling bad
about feeling bad. He wants them to stop punishing themselves for feeling
depressed. I presume that he wants people to accept low moods as a normal part
of life.
But, this assumes that depression results from a failure to
embrace depression.
If that is his argument—his essay does not make it very
clear—then he has simply redefined the defect. If you are depressed you have
not dealt with your bad moods correctly.
That is not all. Rottenberg also suggests that the cultural
environment contributes to the prevalence of depression.
Changes
in the cultural environment magnify these problems. Triggers include
mood-punishing routines—too much work, too much stimulation, and too little
sleep—and even changes in our attitudes toward sadness. Ironically, our
stratospherically high expectations about happiness have made low moods harder
to bear.
I am not sure we have such stratospherically high
expectations about happiness, but we have certainly been told that depression
is easily curable by taking a pill. The medical profession has created the
expectation. In and of itself, this expectation is likely to cause people to
become more depressed when their illness does not respond to
medication.
The medication-based model of treatment tells people that
there is little they can do on their own, through their own efforts to treat
their depression. Surely, this makes it more likely that people will give up on
their efforts to treat their condition.
Obviously, too little sleep does contribute to depression,
as might too much work. But the lack of career success, caused by
not-enough-work, also contributes. We might say the same for social dislocation
and disaffection.
In closing his article Rottenberg described his own
experience with depression. He explained that none of the treatments he tried worked. The depression, he said, simply exhausted itself.
Is he suggesting that we do better to offer less treatment
for depression? Is he saying that all efforts to treat it are futile?
If so, he is coming perilously close to saying that we
should simply give up. Unfortunately, this is the mindset that causes
depression in the first place.
Perhaps Rottenberg has lit on a paradoxical treatment for
depression. Then again, he might have found one of the ways in which the
culture sustains depression.
I heartily recommend Barbara Ehrenreich's book Bright-sided: How the Relentless Promotion of Positive Thinking Has Undermined America.
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me that depression - the profound, de-motivating kind - is both an urgent psychological, perhaps psychosomatic, signal that one's values are misconceived as well as a form of guilt, guilt for not being able to live up to those misconceived values or for having failed to conceive appropriate ones. Guilt is a form of self-punishment. It is natural, and though it ought not to be mindlessly celebrated, it ought not to be automatically classed as a malfunction - as something to be squelched instantly, say by popping a Valium or saying an affirmation.
Rotterberg appears to be on to something: feeling "bad" has survival value; it is information we can turn to good account in improving our lives.
A good book would be one teaching us how to listen to depression productively. If I knew the answer to that for sure, then I would write this book myself.