Socio‐Economic Factors and Mental Health of Young People in India and China: An Elusive Link with Globalization

Abstract

Globalization and its related social, cultural, and economic changes have significant mental health outcomes for young people. However, mental health disorders among youth are seldom included in the range of problems linked to globalization. It is imperative that these multifaceted associations are considered in light of the substantial and increasing burden of disease caused by mental illness, particularly in Asian countries, which are comparatively young and in next few decades will be the major sources of the growth of world's young population. The evidence reviewed in this study makes an argument that globalization has increased [relative] poverty and deprivation, social and income inequality, migration, occupational stress, educational competition, and educated unemployment in India and China. Simultaneously there is evidence which shows that these variables are causally linked with mental health of young people. Altogether, these phenomena are accompanied by higher rates of suicide among lower class, migrant, and student youth. This substantiates the proposition that globalization has significant consequences for the mental health of young people. Some interventions for debate and discussion are considered.

Challenging the Myth of an “Epidemic” of Common Mental Disorders: Trends in the Global Prevalence of Anxiety and Depression Between 1990 and 2010

“…[21] This proposition suggests that Depression and Anxiety evidence for higher urban rates of anxiety and MDD [45] while in contrast there appears a more consistent correlation between urban living and rural-urban migration and sub-threshold symptomatology such as stress reactions and psychological distress. [21] This proposition suggests that Depression and Anxiety evidence for higher urban rates of anxiety and MDD [45] while in contrast there appears a more consistent correlation between urban living and rural-urban migration and sub-threshold symptomatology such as stress reactions and psychological distress.…”

“…It has been hypothesized that common mental disorders may be increasing due to psychosocial stressors such as rising urbanization, which has been linked to mental health problems through higher rates of social and income inequality, occupational stress, and unemployment. [21] This proposition suggests that Depression and Anxiety evidence for higher urban rates of anxiety and MDD [45] while in contrast there appears a more consistent correlation between urban living and rural-urban migration and sub-threshold symptomatology such as stress reactions and psychological distress. [46,47] Another explanation for the lack of increase in prevalence over time may be that, while some risk factors for mental disorders have increased (e.g., relationship breakdowns) others have been mitigated to some degree, such as improved living standards leading to, for instance, higher rates of education [48] and lower levels of illness due to communicable disease and malnutrition.…”

“…[21] However, it is also possible that the perceived increase in common mental disorders is explained by a rise in psychological distress, which can include feelings of excessive worry and unhappiness. [21] However, it is also possible that the perceived increase in common mental disorders is explained by a rise in psychological distress, which can include feelings of excessive worry and unhappiness.…”

“…It has been postulated that an increased exposure to psychosocial stressors, such as rising urbanization, may lead to higher rates of mental disorders. [21] However, it is also possible that the perceived increase in common mental disorders is explained by a rise in psychological distress, which can include feelings of excessive worry and unhappiness. Dimensional scales such as symptom checklists like the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ) provide measures of distress based on nonspecific psychopathology.…”

Poverty, income inequality and externalised problem behaviours of children: an empirical study in Korea

“…The findings of previous studies show that neighbourhood socio-economic characteristics and deprivation level can have negative effects on development of children and adolescents and have been specifically associated with diverse issues such as delinquency, teen pregnancy, children's behavioural problems, health, health behaviours, mental health and aggression (Bhat & Rather, 2012;Cushon, Vu, Janzen, & Muhajarine, 2011;Drukker et al, 2003;Roosa et al, 2005;Sellstrőm & Bremberg, 2006;Viner et al, 2012). Several empirical studies have demonstrated that the poverty level in a neighbourhood can be associated with children's overall development, as well as that those children from families residing in deprived neighbourhoods exhibit more frequent problem behaviours and show a greater incidence of injury risk and severe bodily harm (Drukker et al, 2003;Haynes, Reading, & Gale, 2003;Kalff et al, 2001;Reading, Langford, Haynes, & Lovett, 1999).…”