E
veryone needs it, but no
one wants to ask for it.
“Help” has become a sort
of dirty word, implying weakness
and neediness, that we can’t
handle our problems on our own.
Using the word “help” has come to
mean that you have given in to the
obstacles plaguing your life and
that you don’t have the strength
to carry on by yourself. These
implications are commonplace,
and they are not only false, but
harmful.
I will openly admit that I
absolutely hate asking for help.
Ever since I was a kid, I hated
bothering
my
parents
with
problems with school or peers
and was vehemently opposed to
asking my teachers for assistance
on homework assignments. I
always had good grades and big
groups of unproblematic friends,
so when I did struggle, I didn’t
want to bother any of the adults
in my life with seemingly tiny
problems — I had never needed
the help before, and didn’t want to
start asking then.
As I have aged, I have realized
that asking for help is the most
important thing someone can
do for themselves. Whether it
be for your physical, mental or
academic health, getting words
of advice or affirmation from
an outside source can make all
the difference. It may be hard or
even embarrassing to ask for help,
but when we get into the habit of
understanding its benefits, help
becomes the greatest word one
can use in their vocabulary.
The pandemic has shown many
of us that asking for help is vital
when we feel alone or when we feel
like we need to talk to someone.
In a study by the American
Psychological Association, it was
found that referrals received
by psychologists doubled (from
37% to 62%) from 2020 to 2021,
and that 68% of psychologists
reported an increase in the
number of individuals on their
waitlists.
Amid
a
time
of
such
uncertainty, the frequency of
people requesting help for anxiety
and depression has increased, as
has the number of people taking
advantage
of
mental
health
resources
such
as
telehealth
and in-person counseling. The
pandemic
has
made
people
realize they can’t be alone with
their thoughts, and that asking
for help from professionals is the
best way to get their problems off
their chests and their minds on
the road to wellness and balance.
Still,
though,
requesting
help carries a societal weight.
The British Psychology Society
found that two types of stigmas
exist as it relates to seeking
psychological
help:
public
stigma and self stigma. A “public
stigma” is external, a collection of
stereotypes about mental health
and therapy imposed by those
around us. Public opinion holds a
heavy weight on our perspective
on seeking help, and when there is
judgment from the public, we find
ourselves
avoiding
counseling
because of the negative markers
being applied to us.
A “self stigma” is internal,
assigning ourselves labels based
on our state of mental health,
claiming we are worthless or
“unacceptable” and undeserving
of help. “Public” and “self”
stigmas go hand in hand, and
when we hear the stigmas being
voiced by those around us, we
tend to apply them to ourselves
because of social influences,
especially
those
concerning
mental health. The stigmas that
both society and ourselves have
assigned to mental health and
counseling are what have made
“help” such a dirty word.
Stigmas
around
mental
health exist everywhere, from
the television we consume, to
the dialogues of the people we
surround ourselves with. These
stereotypes lack understanding
about the subject of mental
wellness, making those who have
internal struggles or need help
seem “inhuman” in the eyes of
society. The way we speak to one
another makes a difference in our
perception of mental health as
well.
For example, telling someone
to “just get over” their struggle
with mental illness does much
more harm than good. Words
like these make struggles seem
small and easily surmountable,
and to a person already lacking
motivation, they can be more
debilitating. The interactions we
have with others and the media
often influence how we look at
ourselves. In the case of mental
health — an area where sufferers
already struggle with self-image
— stereotypes and dismissive
comments only make getting
healthy harder.
If we fail to break the stigma
around the word “help,” we
ignore the increasingly more
pertinent necessity of getting
ourselves assistance in times of
need. Despite what society may
tell us, it’s not weird or wrong to
get help — it’s probably one of the
most insightful and courageous
things we can do for ourselves.
Breaking the stigma means
having real discussions about
mental health, using empathetic
language rather than judgemental
tones and empowering those in
our lives who struggle or have
taken steps to get help. The most
important thing, though, is to
avoid self stigmas — we cannot
apply society’s untrue labels to
ourselves and we must remain
confident that the decision to ask
for help is something personal
and meaningful to ourselves and
our livelihoods.
Each one of us should be able to
openly admit that we need help,
whether it be for problems we face
with school or for internalized
struggles with mental health.
No one should be mocked or
marginalized because they have
sought out therapy, and no one
should be bullied about making
an initial request for a listening
ear and helping hand in times of
hardship.
To be our better selves, we
have to break the stigma around
“help” and accept the fact that
some obstacles are too tough to
overcome on our own. Sometimes
we need support, and that isn’t bad
—it’s healthy, and monumentally
brave.
T
he
term
“reproductive
rights”
has
sparked
arguably one of the biggest
political controversies of the last
few years. Yes, I’m talking about
the a-word: abortion. There are
plenty of articles and opinions
going around about this specific
right — whether it is one, whether it
isn’t — but there’s not nearly enough
discussion of the other reproductive
rights you are entitled to.
Those able to bear children are
entitled to certain reproductive
rights and, like any other kind
of right, they should know them
and exercise them. While I will
mostly direct my language towards
“women,” as these rights are
socially associated with “women’s”
rights, note that these rights extend
toward anyone who might be or is
carrying a child, regardless of their
gender identity. I encourage you to
take a look at the full list of rights,
which can be found here.
Many of these reproductive
rights are variations of human
rights declarations and bills that
have been applied to the context of
motherhood. One I find particularly
important, which stems from
human rights arguments, is that
“everyone is their own person from
the moment of birth.” This means
that both mother and baby should
be treated with dignity and respect.
On a related note, everyone
has the right to equitable health
care free from discrimination,
a right that is ensured by the
Universal Declaration of Human
Rights. One hundred ninety-three
countries have agreed to abide by
these rights, including the United
States. This means that everyone
in the United States is guaranteed
these human rights, and the rights
derived from them. Prioritization
of this particular right is especially
important for Black mothers, as
they experience medical racism
that significantly harms their
health, as well as the health of their
babies. For women of Color, the
risks this causes at each stage of
childbirth, including labor, delivery
and postpartum, are elevated. This
right also means that women have
the same protections under the law
while pregnant as they do when
not. In other words, you cannot
be discriminated against for the
listed reasons, including for being
pregnant.
According
to
the
Maternal
Health Task Force at the Harvard
Chan School of Public Health,
“(e)very woman has the right to
information, informed consent and
refusal and respect for her choices
and preferences.” This applies to
all reproductive health choices,
including childbirth. Education on
these rights could directly impact
the health of both mothers and their
children. Currently, the statistics
surrounding childbirth are not
encouraging. The United States’s
maternal mortality rate is almost
double that of other developed
countries, such as Canada, with
17 in 100,000 American mothers
dying
from
childbirth
—
a
distressingly high number. The
infant mortality rate is worse, with
over 500 in 100,000 infants dying,
and this rate is even higher among
Southern states.
A
few weeks ago, United
States
Supreme
Court
Justice Clarence Thomas
said that debate over increasing the
number of U.S. Supreme Court seats
might “compromise” or “chip away
at the respect” of the institution
by politicizing what should be an
impartial body. Less than two weeks
later, it was revealed that Thomas’s
wife, Virginia, had urged then-
White House Chief of Staff Mark
Meadows to overturn the results
of the 2020 presidential election.
In the past few years, the Supreme
Court and its members have become
shrouded in controversy, due not
only to the judges themselves but the
circumstances surrounding their
appointment.
Ironically, Thomas made his
comments about protecting the
court from politics at an event for
the foundation of former Sen. Orrin
Hatch, R-Utah. In 2016, Hatch
took a leading role in blocking the
confirmation of Merrick Garland,
who was nominated by former
President Barack Obama to fill a
vacant Supreme Court seat. Hatch
and his Republican colleagues,
who controlled the Senate at the
time, argued that by keeping the
seat empty, voters would have
an opportunity to influence the
court’s composition through the
2016 presidential election. Garland
went on to be appointed attorney
general last year by President Biden.
The Senate confirmed him with a
70-30 vote, demonstrating that a
significant number of Republicans
approve of his qualifications at least
for that role.
In
2017,
President
Donald
Trump appointed Neil Gorsuch,
a staunch conservative, to fill
the seat Democrats intended for
Garland. Gorsuch was approved by
a 54-45 vote only after Republicans
abolished the filibuster for Supreme
Court confirmations. Sen. Chris
Coons, D-Del., who voted against
Gorsuch, recently admitted that
his decision to vote against the
“eminently
qualified”
nominee
furthered
partisan
animosity
over judicial appointments. Years
later, the swift — not to mention
hypocritical — appointment and
confirmation
of
Justice
Amy
Coney Barrett made it clear that
Republicans cared little about voter
input. They were instead looking for
an opportunity to keep conservative
control of the Supreme Court. It was
during the confirmation of Barrett
that some prominent Democrats —
including Democratic Senate leader
Chuck Schumer, N.Y., began publicly
considering expanding the Supreme
Court.
While Barrett and Gorsuch are
controversial because their seats
are considered “stolen,” controversy
around Justices Clarence Thomas
and Brett Kavanaugh is centered
on the men themselves. In addition
to his wife’s political activities,
Thomas’s
confirmation
hearing
is infamous because of Anita Hill,
who accused Thomas of sexual
harassment and was, in return,
grilled by members of the Senate
Judiciary Committee. One of those
members was Orrin Hatch, who
suggested some of her charges were
inspired by “The Exorcist.” More
recent allegations against Brett
Kavanaugh from Christine Blasey
Ford offer a clear parallel.
On top of increasingly prevalent
issues with their own Supreme
Court
appointees,
Republicans
have
stepped
up
attacks
on
judges nominated by Democrats.
Republican Senators aggressively
questioned Judge Ketanji Brown
Jackson’s sentencing record on
those convicted of child sexual
abuse — ignoring the reasons for
Jackson’s rulings in order to bring
about damaging headlines. Sen.
Tom Cotton, Ark., went as far as
suggesting that Jackson would have
defended Nazis in court.
In his comments in Utah, Thomas
worried about the future of the
Supreme Court. This isn’t about the
future, though — the Supreme Court
has been compromised by politics.
Republicans have ignored serious
character flaws in the cases of
Thomas and Kavanaugh, selectively
prevented confirmation hearings
to capture Barrett and Gorsuch’s
seats and stepped up character
assassination toward Democratic
appointees.
Democrats’
not
entirely unjustified anger towards
four associate justices isn’t going
anywhere. Neither is Republicans’
willingness to aggressively capture
Court seats. Sen. Lindsey Graham,
R-S.C., has said a Republican-
controlled Senate would not have
considered Jackson. Sen. Mitch
McConnell, R-Ken., said it is “highly
unlikely”
a
Republican
Senate
would consider a Biden Supreme
Court nominee in 2024.
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
Opinion
10 — Wednesday, April 20, 2022
Read more at
MichiganDaily.com
Breaking the stigma around “help”
LINDSEY SPENCER
Opinion Columnist
AMY EDMUNDS
Opinion Columnist
A rejuvenated discourse on
reproductive freedom
Office Rush Hours
The Supreme Court has been compromised
by politics — so why not elect justices?
QUIN ZAPOLI
Senior Opinion Editor
Design by Maddy Leja, Opinion Cartoonist
Read more at
MichiganDaily.com