Confront mental health stigma and redefine success

As investigations are ongoing, we do not know the exact motive in the Kaohsiung case. However, we can draw one similarity between the social status of the two persons who committed the tragic acts of destruction – they are both representatives of the “successful” stereotype in society. But that does not mean they are not vulnerable to the turbulences of life. That does not mean they can adeptly dissolve destructive impulses, and lift from a blinding focus on the difficulties of the present and avoid magnifying the perceived insults of life. They sadly proceeded to sacrifice self and others.

Especially critical to our effort to resolve these tragedies should be confronting the yawning chasm of discrimination separating many of those who need mental health treatment and the resources available to help them. The assumption that one is “abnormal” if afflicted with a mental disorder at some point is simply wrong. It is a deep form of hypocrisy to stigmatise those who seek help. There is no inherent inferiority in any form of illness.

According to reports, Lin had trouble academically and halted studies for a year before again failing to meet the standards of his residency. He also had economic problems, and was reputed to be a loner. However, acts of kindness were also not missing from his life – his tuition fees were sponsored by a professor. Kaohsiung Medical University has stated that it provided counselling and financial support.

Did we provide adequate mental health services to those distressed souls? It is clearly established that not enough care was received to avert the tragedies. They happened.

Aside from issues of mental health funding and service availability, allow us to posit some broader trends that may have obstructed help. Stigmas about mental illness, resulting in a sense of shame associated with seeking help, is a possible suspect in the twin tragedies. Deeply ingrained in the public psyche is a sense that those suffering from mental disorders are to “blame” for their illness, whereas those who suffer from physical illness are absolved of this standard of responsibility.

The difficulty of combating stigma against mental disorders is a global challenge. The extreme anti-social behaviour displayed by Lin and Lu reared its ugly head because there was not enough done to prevent the explosion before time ran out.

In looking at these cases, we should remind ourselves of what we can do for those around us. Wherever possible, reaching out to those distressed, offering encouragement and support, and emphasising that there is always an alternative way out of despondency, is something that we all can do for people whose lives criss-cross with our own.

Another entrenched fallacy is the definition of success. In the pursuit of social status and financial security, it is apparent that something important was lost along the way. These young men, faced with different obstacles not only in, but also beyond, their careers, succumbed to passion that led to the utter destruction of their own lives. In one case, a person forfeited life itself. In the other, a person faces the possible termination of several decades in society – if he is offered such leniency (the maximum penalty is death). 

“Success” in life should be integral with dealing with “failure”. As Oprah Winfrey put at her Harvard commencement speech last week: “I want you to remember this: There is no such thing as failure. Failure is just life trying to move us in another direction.”

While recognising that it is dangerous to draw broad conclusions based on incidents of depravity and sorrow, perhaps we can still make some conjectures on how to make a better world. Overcoming society’s mortal stigma – mortal because it costs lives – against seeking help for mental disorders needs to be one compass point. The other is reminding ourselves that success is really dependent on one’s resourcefulness, adaptability and resilience in the face of pressure.