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