Do candidates for office ever see mental-health professionals?

I assume they do. Almost everyone I know has seen or sees now a shrink of some sort, often chronically. These are healthy, fully functional professionals who do it as a kind of mental housekeeping, but if political candidates were even known to have seen a shrink in the dim distant past, I think that would set off alarms for some voters. So–do they ever go, in your view? Do they take any special safeguards against their therapy ever become known? Is it smart of them to see a shrink now and then? Is it healthy for them never to go to a shrink? (I’ve got an appointment this afternoon, and I don’t have a very stressful life just now–I can’t imagine how running for office would stress me out.) Are the days of Daniel Ellsberg and Tom Eagleton a thing of the past?

I would pay money to hear a mental-health professional’s analysis of Michele Bachmann.

Perhaps the people in “Outer Control” habitually go to mental health professionals, but I personally have never been to one as an adult, and don’t know anyone who has been to one as an adult except my mom.

you might know dozens who have, but who wouldn’t tell you if their lives depended on it.

ISTM running for high office, or even getting in a position to do so, *requires *a psychotic level of ambition and even egomania. A pol who was “cured” of those problems would no longer be a pol.

How much? And do you use PayPal?

Probably since the fallout after McGovern picked Thomas Eagleton, nobody with visions of candidacy will ever admit to any mental health treatment.

Um…so you know one in your immediate family and you’re doubting that it’s common?

You go out of your way to ask them?

If PRR knows of a ton of them, and I only know of one, then unless the rate of reportage is different, then the commonality is also much different.

The amount I would pay would depend on the credentials of the “pro” in question, the specifics of the analysis, cooperation from Rep Bachmann, etc. I do use PayPal, but I don’t expect this to happen.

My post was a moment of humor.

I can’t speak about candidates for national office, but Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton was elected regardless of his public announcement that he suffered from and was treated for depression. This has been resurrected in the news recently after a (rather hateful, IMO) speech by a state senator accusing Dayton of being a “pill-popper.”

I would also be happy to contribute $10 US to the Michele Bachmann analysis fund.

It didn’t come out before the last election, but Jesse Jackson, Jr. most certainly is seeing a mental health professional now (possibly more than one). I am wondering how that will affect his re-election chances in the future.

This will probably change in the future, I don’t know any young person that hasn’t been given SSRIs by if not mental health professionals then general practitioners. Basically any complaint can trigger this, insomnia, feeling down, you will be tossed a SSRI.

How can it be a stigma if everyone does it?

I think your perception doesn’t quite reflect reality there. The majority of kids and young adults don’t take SSRIs.

Given at one point does not equal currently taking.

As I said I don’t see how being prescribed a SSRI or other antidepressant at some point in your life can be stigmatizing.


Try applying for a pilot’s license or getting a job as a commercial driver - taking an SSRI can result for a demand you get a clean bill of mental health from a psychiatrist no matter how briefly you took them, no matter for what reason, and no matter how long ago. It can be anything from a minor bump in the road to essentially barring you for life from the goal. Heck, you don’t even need to be prescribed drugs, just admitting you had counseling at some point can turn into a need for very expensive and time consuming tests and screenings.

For some occupations and activities an SSRI or anything indicating mental illness or conditions can be outright damning. The laws might change in the future but it’s going to be quite awhile before that happens, as long as there is a large enough pool of people who have either never sought mental health services or who lie/conceal that fact well enough not to get caught that the need for people in those slots can still be filled.

There is a current trend to giving antipsychotics for insomnia, I know several people who got seroquel and I myself was RXed elavil for straight up insomnia years ago.

Yep. And the entities that license certain activities don’t care about that. If you are prescribed an antipsychotic for insomnia and, for example, apply for a pilot’s license they don’t care they doc said it was for insomnia - it’s an antipsychotic so until proven otherwise the FAA will consider you a psychotic. You’ll have to get a board-certified psychiatrist to certify you are NOT psychotic in order to get a license.

That might become a problem with the increasing popularity of prescribing some of these things, particularly to kids - it’s closes off career avenues very early and very thoroughly unless you have the resources to go through appeals and screenings. I’ve also heard it can screw up the potential for a military career as well but I’m not as familiar with that.

Hell the overuse of ritalin in children is a kind of cultural joke, you see it all the time in sitcoms and movies.

How the hell can someone accurately report that even? I mean I have asthma and I don’t even remember some of the drugs I cycled through as a kid, they could be off the market for all that I know. I mean I could say I remember a strange inhaler that dispersed powder, I think it was blue?:stuck_out_tongue: