The global rise in mental health issues, including depression and anxiety, has sparked a critical conversation about the roots of this crisis. A recent piece by Patrick West at Spiked Online titled “How the age of emotion gave us the mental-health crisis” explores this phenomenon, arguing that societal changes and cultural shifts over the past decades have fundamentally altered how we perceive and address mental health.
West highlights a troubling stat from the Netherlands, where a staggering 60% increase in euthanasia cases tied to psychological suffering has been reported. This startling figure is emblematic of a broader crisis where mental anguish is driving individuals to extreme ends. In 2024, of the 10,000 Dutch patients who chose euthanasia, 10% did so due to mental distress. Such statistics underscore an escalating public health emergency that transcends borders.
While narratives commonly link the surge in mental health issues to the COVID-19 pandemic, West argues that the roots of the crisis extend beyond the pandemic, tracing back to a cultural trend of pathologizing normal emotional responses such as sadness and worry. The pandemic, particularly the lockdowns of 2020 and 2021, exacerbated these conditions but did not initiate them. The lockdown-imposed isolation intensified feelings of depression and anxiety, but these feelings thrived in an environment where emotional fragility had been culturally validated and medicalized over decades.
Looking back, the shift began over 20 years ago when Frank Furedi, in his book “Therapy Culture,” observed how Western culture increasingly viewed emotional challenges as threats, assigning individuals a passive role. This cultural transformation was already evident in the 1990s, a decade marked by an emphasis on emotional intelligence and the celebration of vulnerability as a strength. This backdrop has only intensified in the digital age, where social media and virtual realities often deepen rather than diminish feelings of loneliness, invisibility, and emotional strain.
The implications for Thailand are significant, given that social media penetration and digital engagement are high in the country. Thai society, like many others, confronts a growing tendency to equate digital interaction with real-life connection—a trend that could exacerbate feelings of disconnection and emotional distress. As Thailand’s youth become increasingly entwined in digital spaces, the nation faces a similar potential for heightened mental health issues, compounded by cultural emphases on maintaining “face” and avoiding emotional disclosure.
The cultural lens offered by West suggests that the global therapeutic culture—one that teaches individuals to view themselves as fragile and in need of protection—contributes to a cycle of inaction and dependency. This perspective calls for a re-evaluation of how resilience and emotional robustness are cultivated in educational and community settings.
The report concludes by advocating for a reassessment of how emotions are culturally perceived and managed. Educational curricula in Thailand could benefit from integrating concepts of resilience and emotional management, fostering a culture where emotional challenges are met with empowerment rather than pathologization. This approach could align with Buddhist principles of mindfulness and acceptance, offering a culturally resonant framework for addressing mental health challenges.
For Thai readers, practical recommendations include promoting mindfulness practices and open conversations about emotions within families and schools. By recognizing the naturalness of emotional experiences and emphasizing adaptive coping strategies, Thailand can address its mental health challenges in a way that respects cultural norms and enhances societal well-being.
The insights from West’s article serve as a reminder that addressing mental health requires looking beyond immediate catalysts like the pandemic and focusing on the underlying cultural narratives that shape our responses to emotional wellness.