The traditional solution was that people would speak frequently with other members of their society, who lived and worked closely with them. As consumerism (read: the phenomena of social engineering which encourages individuals to maximise personal opex) led to smaller social units (notice how people like the Flecks live alone, rather than in shared spaces), the rudimentary support for smaller mental health issues has been reduced. This results from a public policy of increasing the rate of private property ownership per individual (read: not just real estate) and conversely decreasing the rate of public commons.
In theory, if the government is going to design policies that encourage smaller social units, and if it isn't going to provide supplementary social workers to replace the infrastructure that went missing with the reduction in size of social units, then individuals will suffer, and as we can see they may be required to seek help out of their own pockets. This is a public policy of privatising mental health services.
We see from the co-living/co-working trend a reflexive move by individuals to return to shared spaces. The need to share space is valuable - although it is not clear that those who seek to collect rent on shared space will be able to do this profitably. Nor is it clear that they should aim to do so.
What can individuals do about this? Be extra attentive to the people who appear to be lacking in friendships, in your various work and living spaces.
What more can individuals do? Lobby your parliamentary representatives, to form coherent policies that reverse the pattern of privatising the commons, at the expense of individuals' well-beings.
Why might anyone oppose this? Well, if you don't believe that mental health is a basic human right, and that it should be bought only by the wealthy, then no need lah to save the common spaces of society! :)
Shit, I seem to have stumbled upon an argument for the immorality of rented co-x spaces. LOL
No comments :
Post a Comment