The Minnesota Daily - Depression screenings faulty

[Guest guest]

SSRI-Research@

Fri, 27 Jan 2006 19:43:03 -0500

[sSRI-Research] The Minnesota Daily - Depression screenings

faulty

 

 

 

 

A tip of the hat to the writer of this piece. Brian is a student at

the University of Minnesota - Twin Cities .

 

 

 

January 25, 2006

 

Depression screenings faulty

Any combination of answers resulted in recommendations to see a

doctor.

 

By Brian Hokanson

 

 

t the beginning of fall semester I noticed fliers in my

residence hall encouraging students to take the free depression

screening test at depression-screening.org.

Having a vague hunch as to what might follow, I visited the Web

site. The first section of the test consists of a list of negative

behaviors such as " feeling bad about yourself " and " feeling tired or

having little energy. " The test-taker chooses how often the statements

have applied to him or her in the past two weeks, from " not at all " to

" nearly every day. "

 

The second part asks you to rate how difficult the behaviors

have made it to function in daily life, from " not difficult at all " to

" extremely difficult. "

 

I decided to test the test. I chose " not at all " for every

behavior on the list except " poor appetite or overeating, " for which I

chose the next option, " several days. " Then, I indicated that my

problems made it " not difficult at all " for me to function.

 

The result? " Your screening results are consistent with minimal

depression . You are advised to see your doctor or a mental health

professional for a complete evaluation as soon as possible. "

 

Just because of my poor appetite? Couldn't I just stop eating at

University Dining Services or something?

 

After fiddling with the test some more, I realized that

virtually any combination of answers resulted in the advice that I see

a doctor as soon as possible. Obviously, this is a flawed test; we all

have small problems, but this alone does not indicate an urgent need

for professional help. I e-mailed the National Mental Health

Association, which sponsors the Web site, explaining the results of my

experiment and requesting that they either remove or alter the test.

 

More than a month later, I received a reply explaining that the

National Mental Health Association's public education department was

examining whether to continue using the test. " It is certainly not our

intention to convince everyone that they have a mental health

problem, " the reply said.

 

Yet today, the test is still online in its original form. Why?

The fine print at the bottom of the page may provide an answer:

" Copyright 1999 Pfizer, Inc. " Yes, not only is the test six years old

- an eternity when it comes to our knowledge of mental health issues -

but it was created by a company that directly benefits every time

another American is medicated.

 

I relate this story as an addendum to the Daily's Dec. 6 article

about suicide prevention ( " U offers resources to prevent suicide and

help others do the same " ) and Dec. 7 article about Seasonal Affective

Disorder ( " People SAD to see less sunlight " ). These articles were

beneficial in that they helped to raise awareness that issues of

mental health are especially important this time of year. However,

neither provided much insight beyond what can be found in a cheesy

counseling office brochure.

 

All communities, especially in the University, ought to look at

creating a new model of mental health awareness and assistance. The

model is centered on the doctor's office; this place is the number one

target of pharmaceutical companies and the drugs they concoct (just

look for the logos the next time you visit). A more effective model

would be community-based, with less intimidating ways of receiving

help from both professionals and peers and an emphasis on all methods

of treatment, especially nonmedicinal methods.

 

Additionally, we must remember medications such as Prozac,

Paxil, Zoloft and others are not magic pills that automatically make

" bad " feelings go away, and in fact, many people are opposed to taking

these mind-altering drugs. It's not because they think the drugs are

guaranteed not to work, nor because they're anti-science

fundamentalist crazies. Rather, they believe the mind is too sacred to

alter on a distant pharmaceutical company's whim, even if that mind

doesn't always conform to society's norms.

 

I hold this viewpoint. However, I don't believe for an instant

that anyone who does use such medication is somehow immoral or

inferior, and I don't believe for an instant that we should ignore

issues of mental health. Conversely, I believe we need to up the

discussion about mental health beyond its current elementary level.

 

That's why I'm writing this commentary. What aspects of the

culture of the University might be contributing to poor mental health?

How can we serve the mental health needs of this community in more

accessible, more responsible, more creative ways? And how can we do it

with students in the lead?

 

Answering these questions will greatly enhance this University

not just in the dark winter months, but year-round. We must answer

them; simply avoiding UDS, although perhaps wise, will not be enough.

 

 

Brian Hokanson is a University student and author of Knowledge

at bjhokanson.blogspot.com/ please send comments to letters.