Crossroads Podcast: How Much Does Faith Really Impact Mental Health?
Anyone who reads mainstream-media coverage of big elections has heard that there is a giant “Catholic vote” lurking in the body politic. But what is a “Catholic voter”?
The problem, of course, is that many self-proclaimed “Catholic” voters are Catholics who rarely go to Mass, let alone to Confession. Then there are voters who use the word “Catholic” to describe their family or cultural background, even though they reject many or even most of the doctrines in the Catholic Catechism.
Polls and news coverage explaining the voting habits of “evangelicals” are haunted by the same kinds of questions. Define an “evangelical” voter. Please.
I thought about these political puzzles when reading the Associated Press report that served as the hook for this week’s “Crossroads” podcast. In this case, the story focused about issues linking religion and mental health. You can see the tensions in the headline: “Does frequent worship lead to better mental health? Often, but not always, experts say.”
Once again, a question emerges: If “religion” helps mental health, are we talking about some vague form of self-defined, vague belief or the actual practice of a faith tradition? Hold that thought.
The key to this AP story is new research and analysis noting the positive impact of religious faith on mental health issues such as depression, drug abuse, anxiety and suicide. But the entire piece doesn’t just explain the new research, it actively attempts to undercut that research, while all but ignoring the contents. Check out the overture:
Worldwide, the landscape of religion is not serene. Many denominations have been racked by divisions. In some regions, believers are targeted with violence. Countless faith leaders have betrayed their flocks via corruption or sexual abuse.
Against this backdrop, there has been a long-running discussion about the role that religion can play in enhancing personal well-being and lowering the risk of mental health problems.
A positive view of religious faith’s relation to mental health is shared by several prominent U.S. mental health organizations, including the National Alliance on Mental Illness and Mental Health America.
On the other hand:
The American Psychological Association takes a nuanced approach, reflecting the views of several experts who shared theirs with The Associated Press.
The APA says its Handbook of Psychology, Religion and Spirituality “sheds light on the many purposes religion serves, the rich variety of religious and spiritual beliefs and practices, and the capacity of religion and spirituality to do both good and harm.”
And so forth and so on. Finally, 400 words into a 700-word report, the Associated Press team offered a small byte of information about the actual study that served as the “news hook” for this report (which was sent to the vast majority of American newspapers).
In all, that “news hook” was given 125 words, in three paragraphs.
Obviously, a hard-news report of this kind should include voices that are critical of research on topics this complex. The question, in this AP report, is whether readers had any chance to understand or evaluate the claims made in the new study by the Wheatley Institute at Brigham Young University (.pdf here). Readers do see this:
Citing an analysis of hundreds of previous studies, the report says that committed religious involvement — corresponding to at least weekly attendance at worship services — was linked to lower suicide risk, better stress management, reduced substance misuse, and higher levels of hope.
But the Associated Press also flashed this warning:
The institute describes as its basic mission: “Research-supported work that fortifies the core institutions of the family, religion, and constitutional government.”
What about the worldviews and possible biases of other organizations and experts quoted in the story, such as — in the final passages — the American Humanist Association? Not relevant, apparently.
There is another passage in this hard-news story that is actually quite helpful, even if it ispresented in a way that appears to challenge the Wheatley Institute material,
Charles Camosy, a professor of moral theology and bioethics at The Catholic University of America, also shared nuanced thoughts.
“We expect on the one hand that being faithful will bring with it good things in this life,” Camosy said in an email.
Yet “living out the Gospel doesn’t lead to healthy, flourishing lives for everyone. People still get sick, including mentally ill,” he added. “Christians, and especially faithful Christians who are salt and light in a world full of violence and injustice, are not promised mental health as a reward for faithfulness in this life.”
However, the Wheatley report discusses these complex realities, according to material in a Religion Unplugged feature that includes more than a sentence of two of the findings: “Science Says Religion Is Good For Your Mental Health.” The study also stresses that “religious involvement,” religious practice and supportive congregations are crucial. The team at BYU noted:
… that “religious involvement is far more often associated with beneficial outcomes than harmful ones.” For mental health specifically, for every study reporting a negative association between religious involvement and mental health, there are 10 studies that report positive associations.
Participation in religious communities can serve as a protective factor, helping adherents cope with stress and find meaning in life.
In the podcast, I stressed another part of the equation — the importance of intact marriages and unbroken homes. Thus, the Wheatley report noted:
Among the high-quality studies on religion and depression, 74% of the studies “noted better mental health among the more religious,” and as for studies about the religion-anxiety connection, 69% noted lower levels of anxiety among the religious.
There are several reasons for this, the researchers say. Religious involvement is strongly associated with a more stable marriage and more functional families, which makes individuals in those marriages and families less likely to have depression and anxiety.
Plus, life circumstances that could lead to serious depression, such as poverty, bad habits, domestic violence, divorce, disability, natural disaster and stress, can be mitigated by religious communities that encourage healthy habits and provide material and moral support following traumatic events.
Once again: Does religious practice matter more than vague claims of religiosity?
In its discussion of the strikingly lower number of suicide among young believers, the BYU report added this crucial information.
… 89% of studies reported lower rates of suicide among the more religious, with only 8% of studies reporting higher suicidality. For young people and teens, intense religious participation can be especially protective.
“A modest amount of religion ... does not appear to make a consistent difference in the lives of U.S. teenagers. It is only the more serious religious teens, the ‘regulars’ and the ‘Devoteds,’ whose outcomes are more consistently and significantly more positive than those of their entirely religiously Disengaged peers,” sociologists Christian Smith and Melinda Lundquist Denton said in the report.
Should the contents of the Wheatley report be discussed and debated?
Of course. That’s basic journalism. However, it is also important for journalists to include accurate, quoted material from a study of this kind in their hard-news stories, thus allowing readers a chance to understand the facts and the claims that are being debated.
I will end with one other question: Do some newsrooms have policies that require reporters to seek out experts in progressive or largely secular “blue” ZIP codes (such as the Amtrak “Acela zone” between Washington, D.C., and Boston) instead of those in “red” ZIP codes that frequently contain growing, thriving religious communities and academic institutions?
If the goal is a debate featuring diverse sources of information and analysis, it might have helped to call — in this case — a few experts that teach and do research in counseling programs and think tanks with strong ties to traditional religious believers and the communities in which they live and worship.
Maybe? Just asking.