Robert Booker's Mental Health VIPs

Child and forced marriage

Main articles: Child marriage and Forced marriage

Poster against child and forced marriage

The practice of forcing young girls into early marriage, common in many parts of the world, is threatening their reproductive health. According to the World Health Organization:[86]

The sexual and reproductive health of the female in a child marriage is likely to be jeopardized, as these young girls are often forced into sexual intercourse with an older male spouse with more sexual experience. The female spouse often lacks the status and the knowledge to negotiate for safe sex and contraceptive practices, increasing the risk of acquiring HIV or other sexually transmitted infections, as well as the probability of pregnancy at an early age.

Niger has the highest prevalence of child marriage under 18 in the world, while Bangladesh has the highest rate of marriage of girls under age 15.[87] Practices such as bride…

Sexual and reproductive health (SRH)[1] is a field of research, health care, and social activism that explores the health of an individual's reproductive system and sexual well-being during all stages of their life.[2][3][4] Sexual and reproductive health is more commonly defined as sexual and reproductive health and rights,[5] to encompass individual agency to make choices about their sexual and reproductive lives.

The term can also be further defined more broadly within the framework of the World Health Organization's (WHO) definition of health―as "a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being, and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity"―.[6] WHO has a working definition of sexual health (2006) as '“…a state of physical, emotional, mental and social well-being in relation to sexuality; it is not merely the absence of disease, dysfunction or infirmity. Sexual health requires a positive and respectful approach to sexuality and sexual relationships, as well as…

Health promotion is, as stated in the 1986 World Health Organization (WHO) Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion, the "process of enabling people to increase control over, and to improve their health."[1]

Scope

The WHO's 1986 Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion and then the 2005 Bangkok Charter for Health Promotion in a Globalized World defines health promotion as "the process of enabling people to increase control over their health and its determinants, and thereby improve their health".[2] Health promotion is a multifaceted approach that goes beyond individual behavior change. It encompasses a wide range of social and environmental interventions aimed at addressing health determinants such as income, housing, food security, employment, and quality working conditions.[3][4]

It is important to distinguish between health education and health promotion. Health education refers to structured learning activities aimed at improving health literacy, while health promotion encompasses broader social and environmental interventions designed to support healthy…

In some instances, medical guidance and help may be accompanied by embarrassment. This form of embarrassment is associated with increased depression and anxiety,[1] and patients report that it is a critical reason for them to avoid care or to lie about the nature and extent of their lifestyle choices, evading potential lectures about their behaviour.[2] Oftentimes, health-related embarrassment is fuelled by the stigma of the issue.[3]

Contributing factors

Situational influences

Embarrassment can emerge from the environment, such as if there is a doctor of the opposite sex[4] and if there is an examination performed, which may elicit embarrassment if conducted by a parent on someone underage.[5] This effect may be enhanced if the removal of clothes is required for scans, as patients may possess a negative body image. Additionally, unfamiliarity with treatment has been shown to encourage embarrassment. Medical treatment in more close-knit, rural communities elevates embarrassment as well, as…

Self-esteem is confidence in one's own worth, abilities, or morals. Self-esteem encompasses beliefs about oneself (for example, "I am loved", "I am worthy") as well as emotional states, such as triumph, despair, pride, and shame.[1] Smith and Mackie define it by saying "The self-concept is what we think about the self; self-esteem, is the positive or negative evaluations of the self, as in how we feel about it (see self)."[2]

The construct of self-esteem has been shown to be a desirable one in psychology, as it is associated with a variety of positive outcomes, such as academic achievement,[3][4] relationship satisfaction,[5] happiness,[6] and lower rates of criminal behavior. The benefits of high self-esteem are thought to include improved mental and physical health, and less anti-social behavior[7] while drawbacks of low self-esteem have been found to be anxiety, loneliness, and increased vulnerability to substance abuse.[8]

Self-esteem can apply to a specific attribute…

Narcissism is a self-centered personality style characterized as having an excessive preoccupation with oneself and one's own needs, often at the expense of others.[1][2] Narcissism, named after the Greek mythological figure Narcissus, has evolved into a psychological concept studied extensively since the early 20th century, and it has been deemed highly relevant in various societal domains.[3]

Narcissism exists on a continuum that ranges from normal to abnormal personality expression.[4] While many psychologists believe that a moderate degree of narcissism is normal and healthy in humans, there are also more extreme forms, observable particularly in people who have a personality condition like narcissistic personality disorder (NPD), where one's narcissistic qualities become pathological,[4][5] leading to functional impairment and psychosocial disability.[6] It has also been discussed in dark triad studies, along with subclinical psychopathy and Machiavellianism.[7][8][9]

Historical background

The term narcissism is derived from Narcissus, a character in Greek mythology best known from…

In psychoanalysis, the narcissism of small differences (German: der Narzissmus der kleinen Differenzen) is the idea that the more a relationship or community shares commonalities, the more likely the people in it are to engage in interpersonal feuds and mutual ridicule because of hypersensitivity to minor differences perceived in each other.[1] The term was coined by Sigmund Freud in 1917, based on the earlier work of English anthropologist Ernest Crawley. Crawley theorized that each individual is separated from others by a taboo of personal isolation, which is effectively a narcissism of minor differences.[2]

Usage

The title page of Civilization and Its Discontents, in which Freud developed his theory.

The term appeared in Freud's Civilization and Its Discontents (1929–30) in relation to the application of the inborn aggression in man to ethnic (and other) conflicts, a process still considered by Freud, at that point, as a convenient and relatively harmless satisfaction…

There are several connections, and intricate relationships between collective and individual narcissism, or between individual narcissism stemming from group identities or activities, however no single relationship between groups and individuals is conclusive or universally applicable. In some cases, collective narcissism is an individual's idealization of the ingroup to which they belong,[20] while in another the idealization of the group takes place at a more group-level, rather than an instillation within each individual member of the group.[1] In some cases, one might project the idealization of himself onto his group,[21] while in another case, the development of individual-narcissism might stem from being associated with a prestigious, accomplished, or extraordinary group.[1][22]

An example of the first case listed above is that of national identity. One might feel a great sense of love and respect for one's nation, flag, people, city, or governmental systems as a result of a collectively narcissistic perspective.[20] It…

In social psychology, collective narcissism (or group narcissism) is the tendency to exaggerate the positive image and importance of a group to which one belongs.[1][2] While the classic definition of narcissism focuses on the individual, collective narcissism extends this concept to similar excessively high opinions of a person's social group, and suggests that a group can function as a narcissistic entity.[1]

Collective narcissism is related to ethnocentrism. While ethnocentrism is an assertion of the ingroup's supremacy, collective narcissism is a self-defensive tendency to invest unfulfilled self-entitlement into a belief in an ingroup's uniqueness and greatness. Thus, the ingroup is expected to become a vehicle of actualisation of frustrated self-entitlement.[2] In addition, ethnocentrism primarily focuses on self-centeredness at an ethnic or cultural level, while collective narcissism is extended to any type of ingroup.[1][3]

Collective narcissism is associated with intergroup hostility.[2]

Development of the concept

In Sigmund Freud's 1922 study Group Psychology…

Elitism is the notion that individuals who form an elite — a select group with desirable qualities such as intellect, wealth, power, physical attractiveness, notability, special skills, experience, lineage — are more likely to be constructive to society and deserve greater influence or authority.[1] The term elitism may be used to describe a situation in which power is concentrated in the hands of a limited number of people. Beliefs that are in opposition to elitism include egalitarianism, anti-intellectualism (against powerful institutions perceived to be controlled by elites), populism, and the political theory of pluralism.

Elite theory is the sociological or political science analysis of elite influence in society: elite theorists regard pluralism as a utopian ideal. Elitism is closely related to social class and what sociologists term "social stratification". In modern Western societies, social stratification is typically defined in terms of three distinct social classes: the upper class, the middle…

In ethical philosophy, ethical egoism is the normative position that moral agents ought to act in their own self-interest. It differs from psychological egoism, which claims that people can only act in their self-interest. Ethical egoism also differs from rational egoism, which holds that it is rational to act in one's self-interest.[1] Ethical egoism holds, therefore, that actions whose consequences will benefit the doer are ethical.[2]

Ethical egoism contrasts with ethical altruism, which holds that moral agents have an obligation to help others. Egoism and altruism both contrast with ethical utilitarianism,[3] which holds that a moral agent should treat one's self (also known as the subject) with no higher regard than one has for others (as egoism does, by elevating self-interests and "the self" to a status not granted to others). But it also holds that one is not obligated to sacrifice one's own interests (as altruism does) to help…

A mental model is an internal representation of external reality: that is, a way of representing reality within one's mind. Such models are hypothesized to play a major role in cognition, reasoning and decision-making. The term for this concept was coined in 1943 by Kenneth Craik, who suggested that the mind constructs "small-scale models" of reality that it uses to anticipate events. Mental models can help shape behaviour, including approaches to solving problems and performing tasks.

In psychology, the term mental models is sometimes used to refer to mental representations or mental simulation generally. The concepts of schema and conceptual models are cognitively adjacent. Elsewhere, it is used to refer to the "mental model" theory of reasoning developed by Philip Johnson-Laird and Ruth M. J. Byrne.

History

The term mental model is believed to have originated with Kenneth Craik in his 1943 book The Nature of Explanation.[1][2] Georges-Henri Luquet in…

A mindset refers to an established set of attitudes of a person or group concerning culture, values, philosophy, frame of reference, outlook, or disposition.[1][2] It may also develop from a person's worldview or beliefs about the meaning of life.[3]

Some scholars claim that people can have multiple types of mindsets.[4]

More broadly, scholars may have found that mindset is associated with a range of functional effects in different areas of people's lives. This includes influencing a person's capacity for perception by functioning like a filter, a frame of reference, a meaning-making system, and a pattern of perception. Mindset is described as shaping a person's capacity for development by being associated with passive or conditional learning, incremental or horizontal learning, and transformative or vertical learning. Mindset is also believed to influence a person's behavior, having deliberative or implemental action phases, as well as being associated with technical or adaptive approaches to…

A mental representation (or cognitive representation), in philosophy of mind, cognitive psychology, neuroscience, and cognitive science, is a hypothetical internal cognitive symbol that represents external reality or its abstractions.[1][2]

Mental representation is the mental imagery of things that are not actually present to the senses.[3] In contemporary philosophy, specifically in fields of metaphysics such as philosophy of mind and ontology, a mental representation is one of the prevailing ways of explaining and describing the nature of ideas and concepts.

Mental representations (or mental imagery) enable representing things that have never been experienced as well as things that do not exist.[4] Our brains and mental imageries allow us to imagine things have either never happened or are impossible and do not exist. Although visual imagery is more likely to be recalled, mental imagery may involve representations in any of the sensory modalities, such as hearing, smell, or taste. Stephen Kosslyn proposes…

A mental state, or a mental property, is a state of mind of a person. Mental states comprise a diverse class, including perception, pain/pleasure experience, belief, desire, intention, emotion, and memory. There is controversy concerning the exact definition of the term. According to epistemic approaches, the essential mark of mental states is that their subject has privileged epistemic access while others can only infer their existence from outward signs. Consciousness-based approaches hold that all mental states are either conscious themselves or stand in the right relation to conscious states. Intentionality-based approaches, on the other hand, see the power of minds to refer to objects and represent the world as the mark of the mental. According to functionalist approaches, mental states are defined in terms of their role in the causal network independent of their intrinsic properties. Some philosophers deny all the aforementioned approaches by holding that the term "mental" refers…

Psychosocial

Psychotherapy is also widely recommended, though not widely used in the treatment of schizophrenia, due to reimbursement problems or lack of training. As a result, treatment is often confined to psychiatric medication.[112]

Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is used to target specific symptoms and improve related issues such as self-esteem and social functioning. Although the results of early trials were inconclusive[113] as the therapy advanced from its initial applications in the mid-1990s, meta-analytic reviews suggested CBT to be an effective treatment for the psychotic symptoms of schizophrenia.[114][115] Nonetheless, more recent meta analyses have cast doubt upon the utility of CBT as a treatment for the symptoms of psychosis.[116][117][118]

Another approach is cognitive remediation therapy, a technique aimed at remediating the neurocognitive deficits sometimes present in schizophrenia. Based on techniques of neuropsychological rehabilitation, early evidence has shown it to be cognitively effective, resulting in the improvement of previous deficits in psychomotor…