We have all heard of moody teenagers. Maybe we have them, or can remember being one. Recent research with my Australian colleagues suggests they may genuinely have more difficulty living with poor mental health than adults do.
Specifically, compared to the general public aged 18+, they are more likely to view mental health related impairments as being worse than physical disabilities.
This is not just an academic curiosity – if true, it means society is probably under-investing in child mental health. To explain why, we must first understand how most European countries decide on health funding priorities.
In general, disabilities with the greatest capacity to benefit from treatment are prioritised. To find out whether pain, depression, or some other, physical, impairment to health is worst – and therefore has the greatest potential benefit from treatment – nations conduct large population-based surveys. These require adults to make choices between lots of possible impaired health states in order to find out just how bad these are, relative to each other.
Of course, people often disagree on what is worst, and by how much, so decisions must be made as to whose values matter most. European nations generally agree that it is unethical to allow the rich to dictate what disabilities are most deserving of resources. Instead of “one € one vote”, it is “one person one vote”: taking a simple average of every adult’s values does this naturally.
Whilst this sounds fair and democratic in terms of process, it could be leading to uncomfortable outcomes for our moody teenager.
The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.