Yes, we can change — an old idea that needs more publicity

According to statistics, 19% of Britons are classified as disabled.

The Government has a rather loose definition of disability as ReviseSociology explains (emphases mine):

Anyone ticking YES/ YES and either ‘my illness affects me a lot or a little’ is classified by the UK government as disabled.

The problem with the above is that if you have Asthma and similar mild conditions you could be classified as disabled, and this doesn’t tie in with the government’s own definition of disability which requires that someone has a condition which ‘substantially’ affects their ability to carry out every day tasks.

Stating that you have asthma which affects your breathing a little, does NOT IMO qualify you as disabled, but it does in this survey.

The government doesn’t publish the breakdown of responses to the final disability question, but it’s roughly a 50-50 split between those answering ‘a lot’ and ‘a little.

In conclusion, it might be more accurate to say that one in ten people is disabled.

Even so, that is still a lot of people.

The report, Family Resources Survey 2018/2019, states (p. 7, PDF p. 8):

Of those who reported a disability, 27 per cent reported a mental health impairment in 2018/19, up from 24 per cent in 2016/17. This is an increase of 12 per cent in the numbers of people reporting a mental health impairment, overtaking the number reporting dexterity impairments (which fell by five per cent).

The next page says:

Working–age adults were the most likely group to report mental health impairments, with 39 per cent of disabled working–age adults reporting this type of impairment, compared to 36 per cent in 2016/17. In contrast mobility impairments for disabled working–age adults have fallen from 43 to 40 per cent in the same period. Children were much more likely to have learning or social/behavioural impairments than adults. Thirty–four per cent of disabled children were reported to have a learning impairment. Across all ages, there has been an 18 per cent increase in social/behavioural impairments during the last three years, with 42 per cent of disabled children now reporting a social/behavioural impairment.

Beneath that paragraph is an alarming graph breaking down reported disability by nation or, in the case of England, by region, with the following explanation:

The prevalence of people reporting a disability varied across the UK. The North East had the highest percentage of people reporting a disability in 2018/19; 28 per cent (0.7 million people). The percentage of people reporting a disability was higher than the UK national average in Wales (25 per cent), Scotland (24 per cent), and Northern Ireland (23 per cent). In contrast, London had the lowest percentage, 13 per cent, of people reporting a disability (1.2 million people), followed by the South East, with 19 per cent (1.7 million people).

These regional differences could partially be explained by the varying demographics in each region, for example disability prevalence may correlate with the percentage of the population of State Pension age in a particular region, noting that reporting of a disability is more than double amongst this age group, compared to the overall population (see Table 4.1 and 4.4 for full data).

Hmm.

A cynic would say that this is about benefits, or, in popular parlance, ‘being on the sick’.

With that in mind, I was intrigued and encouraged to read an article in The Guardian on February 13, 2023: ‘The big idea: your personality is not set in stone’.

It’s by David Robson, the author of The Expectation Effect: How Your Mindset Can Transform Your Life.

I skipped through the first half of the article, which most people commenting, sadly, did not. Here’s the main point:

What if educating people about their potential for personality change placed them on a more positive trajectory? To test this idea, Jessica Schleider, assistant professor of clinical psychology at Stony Brook University, New York, and John R Weisz, professor of psychology at Harvard, selected a group of around 100 adolescents who had previously shown signs of anxiety or depression. They took a brief computerised course that explained the science of brain plasticity, alongside statements from older students, who described the ways they had grown over their school years. They were then given worksheets to consolidate what they had learned.

When Schleider and Weisz checked in on the teens’ mental health nine months later, the students reported a significant decrease in their anxiety and depression compared with those who had instead taken part in a course on “emotional expression”. The same strategy has since been tested in other settings, with larger numbers of participants, that have produced equally positive outcomes. Teaching people about personality growth is not a panacea, but these results suggest that it may be a useful tool to help build greater psychological resilience.

Whether you are wrestling with serious issues or simply want to polish off your rougher edges, it is reassuring to know that character is ultimately within your own hands. DNA and our upbringing may predispose us to certain traits, but we also have the power to shape our future selves.

It is a pity that comments on the article were so negative. What logically-thinking person wouldn’t want to be less anxious or depressed?

Then again, some people use depression and anxiety — the two often go together — as a comfy cloak. I know one person who has been on anti-depressants for years. The dosage seems to get higher and higher as the decades pass. That person had a well-educated married mother who, for whatever reason, became a recluse in middle-age and stayed that way for the rest of her life. How tragic. Did my friend adopt a learned example?

Parliamentarians often bring up the UK’s mental health statistics during debates, especially those involving young people. It would seem to me that teaching youngsters about brain plasticity and hearing from older students who evolved positively during their school years would be a good direction in which to move. It would enable them to progress to further education, either in a trade or at university.

The article discusses another experiment involving changing personality traits:

In one 15-week trial of nearly 400 people, participants accepted an average of two challenges each week. Provided they actually completed those tasks, their traits shifted in the desired direction, according to a standard big five questionnaire.

Similarly exciting results could be seen in a later experiment, which used a smartphone app to coach participants in their desired big five traits. Crucially, this study involved a much larger sample – 1,500 people. And in addition to the typical self-report questionnaires, it asked participants’ friends and family to rate their personalities before and after the intervention. The differences were still apparent three months after the experiment had ended. As Aristotle argued more than 2,300 years ago, we become what we repeatedly do.

The unexpected malleability of our minds should be good news for anyone who wishes they were a bit more sociable, organised, or happy-go-lucky. Another potential benefit is that awareness of this research could help improve mental health.

What are we waiting for?

I remember when, in the 1980s, self-help books were all the rage. Maybe it’s time to give them — and cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) — another look rather than play the victim.