September 2010
The axing of X-Factor hopeful on grounds of her use of mental health services reinforces all the stereotypes campaigners have been working for years to dispel.
Ignominious exit
The national coverage of Johnson's ignominious exit from the prime time talent show last week has done more to damage the perception of people affected by this condition than has probably been seen in decades.
The way in which the TV reality programmes executives have handled this issue has sent a powerful message about how anyone who uses mental health services should be treated.
With an estimated 12.5 million viewers tuned in to the first series of the Saturday night prime-time talent show, any decision made about a contestant based on their mental health history was bound to get widespread media coverage.
The scandal of exactly how a contestant's confidential medical history became serialised across the tabloid press has still to come to light. But the decision to send Johnson home has clearly told the nation that those who use mental health services cannot hack it, when it comes to high pressured jobs, even though this is clearly not the case.
Service users in high pressured jobs
There are currently thousands of people making a positive contribution to the economy who have also used or are currently using mental health services, albeit in secret for fear of being stereotyped or even losing their jobs.
Department of Health statistics show that one in four people will have a mental health problem at some point in their lives with the vast majority still contributing to society and in some cases holding down high pressured and high profile jobs.
TV presenter Trisha, the former head of HBOS, Sir Dennis Stephenson, boxer Frank Bruno, Lord Alistair Campbell, and the former prime minster of Norway Kjell Magner Bonvevik are all testament to the fact that you can have a diagnosed mental health condition and still maintain a successful high pressured career.
The widespread coverage of Johnson's unwilling exit from the show will have undone much of the work the UK's biggest ever mental health anti-stigma programme, Time To Change. Launched in 2009, the £18 million pound drive was rolled out to address negative stereotypes and reduce stigma of people who use mental health services.
Reinforcing stereotypes
Sadly last week's headlines referring to Johnson as a ‘Nutter' and ‘Ticking Time Bomb' will have done much to reinforce many of the negative perceptions this campaign and other charities are working so hard to address.
Rather than empathising or making efforts to accept people affected by this health condition in the same way people with psychical health conditions are treated, the actions of the X-Factor like so many agencies across the UK has discriminated against those who are already marginalised because of how society perceives them.
It is unlawful to discriminate against anyone who is capable of doing a role based on a mental health condition under the Disability Discrimination Act. However, research shows that less than 40% of employers would consider taking on someone who had a mental health problem.
The discrimination faced by this group means that mental health service users have the highest levels of unemployment among any disabled group, even though they have the highest ‘want to work' rate. The X-Factors actions will mean that Johnson may be forced to join their ranks.
Ignorance surrounding mental illness
Ignorance and misinformation about mental illness is widespread; a survey by the Department of Health found that 11% of people said that they would not want to live next to someone with a mental health problem. While 18% thought the main cause of mental illness was lack of self discipline and will power.
While understanding the broadcasters responsibility to ensure that participants are up to a show like the X-Factor, Johnsons' ability to navigate last week's media circus shows that she may in fact have what it takes to succeed.
What we now need to see is responsible reporting on this issue and an about turn in the X-Factors decision, which could well lead the way in turning the tide on public perceptions of this group.