I have seen a few comments in other threads that mention culture in reference to how people views mental illness, especially the family members of someone experiencing mental illness. In the US, and here I mean "garden variety" Americans, mental illness is losing some of its stigma, and from what I understand the Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare") required mental illness be treated on the same terms as physical illness. Still, there is prejudice and misunderstanding among much of the populace about this category of illness.
How do other cultures view mental illness, and what is the impact on the ability of people who have it to cope with it, seek treatment, and get on with their lives?
This thread is not in Support/Advice subforum, but please be mindful as you comment that this is a sensitive topic for many people, especially those sharing personal experiences.
Its much the same here, big surprises as its part of the anglo-sphere, and I still encounter shocking prejudice among professionals who really, really should know better.
Anyway, so far as I am concerned a lot of mental illness IS physical illness, at least the relationship or correlation between them is very close. This might sound like the old fashioned medical model, or "its all organic/brain, or its not mental illness", that persists sure but its been transcended by the biopsychosocial model. The thinking behind it comes in for the usual flak, criticism of the evidence base, criticism that its more aspirational than actual. Those criticisms could be true enough, depending on the people or contexts involved, unfortunately, I would have a hard time arguing that its always possible to achieve true standardization or congruence between practice and policy/theory. I'm not being an apologist or making excuses, just on this issue like any other I think there needs to be a pessimism of the intellect and optimism of the will to make improvements.
A lot of it comes down to debates about psycho-pharmacology, people shouldnt be as ashamed of reliance on medication as sometimes they appear to be, I definitely dont find diabetics feeling that way about their medication. There is burn out and frustration (fear and anxiety too) associated with reliance but not concerns about competence, capability or adequacy, either expressed by the individual or others. It is shocking the amount of times I've encountered opinion that anyone using medications for corrective purposes will automatically experience flawed judgements thereafter, it really is very serious as I've also seen the same individuals who would have second thoughts about individuals with medical reliance issues excusing alcoholism, illicit or recreational drug use, in themselves or others.
So I think there is a cultural dimension to seeking help, using certain sorts of help, ongoing help even.
The thing about any health service which will make direct provision, like the UK, is that this is probably not going to look like what people expect (and people expect all sorts of really unrealistic or incredibly, I mean INCREDIBLY, vague things already when it comes to mental health and emotional well being). It could be pretty basic and time limited. Demand is already high in relation to these kinds of services, I expect it to get higher too but I dread a day in which "insatiable consumerism" proper gets totally integrated into the mix. This can be effected by whether or not there are established prescribing and therapy cultures already and how much they overlap etc.
After the advent of the public health insurance or direct provision what is the likely mix of public/private supply to be? Will there be a two speed provision contingent on private wealth? If there is will it simply result in a poor service for poor people? That gives rise to further "resentiment" (in Nietzsche's sense) in some parts of the population and all sorts "indirect" pressures, stressors, illness on the part of the "worried well" who live in a shared space with the sick.
One final point, I would say this because of some of my personal and professional bias, but there are two major factors people need to think about, which are broadly speaking cultural and effect mental health. The public attitudes towards personal responsibility, social reciprocity etc. really, really matter. No matter how good, ie comprehensive, responsive, paternalistic even, a service is if its users are going to chaotic, abuse the service, tie it up in games playing (in the sense of The Games People Play) etc. It will be of little benefice. Its not the role of services, not entirely anyway, to determine public attitudes. The second factor, which I think is very significant, is other cultural expectations and issues which have massive implications of public and personal mental health and emotional well being, ie crime and punishment, utilities, urban dereliction/renewal, corruption, war/foreign policy even (particularly to families, communities and individuals in services).
There's 1001 memes and truisms which really do reflect a reality, like the cartoon dog sitting as the house burns and saying "this is fine" or the old saying "when you begin to doubt your mental health ensure you are not surrounded by assholes". Being adjusted to a bad situation is not a good idea and it definitely should never, ever become public policy. Its also unsustainable, there are limits to human adaptation/maladaption, something gives eventually.