Though mental distress poses a large and growing threat to population health, our understanding of how its social distribution has changed over time and what these changes imply for mental health equity is limited. To address this, we use data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System to non-parametrically describe how age-standardized prevalence of frequent mental distress (FMD) and social inequities in FMD have changed in the United States between 1993 and 2019 for intersectional social groups defined by ethnicity, race, sex, educational attainment, and household poverty status. We find that age-standardized FMD prevalence has increased for almost all social groups, that health inequities between more and less privileged groups have mostly widened in absolute terms but narrowed relatively, and that relying solely on common group FMD summaries masks substantial heterogeneity across intersectional subgroups. Our findings show an urgent need to address the sociopolitical determinants of mental distress, prioritizing policies which would address the growing inequitable burden experienced by those less privileged.
We critically examine how biological narratives of mental illness mediate relations between personal experiences and socio-structural conditions of distress in crisis contexts. Using three case studies of contemporary crises in Russia, the Republic of Cameroon, and Bangladesh, we showcase the ways in which biological meanings of mental illness carry political and structural significance as authorities employ “biologization” for political ends. In Russia, biologization is strategically useful to authorities seeking to control a populace, as chronic “conditions” can be “treated” indefinitely. In Cameroon, state psychiatrists in Yaoundé incentivize patient citizenship through biological frameworks of illness and intervention. In Bangladesh, the embodied presence of Rohingya refugees is a medium by which they can engage politically; therapeutic intervention becomes a site of political consensus in which Rohingya enact a “fictive biological citizenship.” Biologization of mental illness forms a basis for reinforcing or challenging the power of the state and the meaning of citizenship in distinct ways across these three contexts, highlighting the importance of attending to its political implications as it is invoked in frameworks of diagnosis, explanation, prognosis, and treatment in global contexts of ostensible crisis.