Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog

News and views about philosophy, the academic profession, academic freedom, intellectual culture, and other topics. The world’s most popular philosophy blog, since 2003.

  1. Fool's avatar
  2. Santa Monica's avatar
  3. Charles Bakker's avatar
  4. Matty Silverstein's avatar
  5. Jason's avatar
  6. Nathan Meyvis's avatar
  7. Stefan Sciaraffa's avatar

    The McMaster Department of Philosophy has now put together the following notice commemorating Barry: Barry Allen: A Philosophical Life Barry…

Disclosing mental health problems on an application in connection with philosophical interests related to those experiences

Brian Leiter

A student writes:

I am a college graduate looking to apply to philosophy graduate programs this fall. My primary interests are in the fields of philosophy of mind and philosophy of psychology, with a special interest in issues in the philosophy of mental illness. I have interest in other issues within these disciplines, such as personal identity, embodied cognition, memory and it's effects on sense of self, among other things, but I am especially interested in philosophy and mental illness. One of the reasons this issue in particular is so important to me is because I suffer from bipolar and borderline personality disorder. My struggles with these disorders, as well as my experiences with difference therapies and treatment theories, have incited an interest in the philosophical questions associated with mental illness. My question is whether or not I should mention my disorders in my personal statements or statements of purpose. I have succeeded academically for many years despite my disability, but I am worried mentioning it would scare off prospective schools and make me look weak or unable to handle the stress of graduate work. On the other hand, my disorders are a driving force behind my interests in the fields of philosophy of mind and psychology and also give me a unique perspective on issues within both fields. What should I do?

My own view, which I've already communicated to the student, is that it's not necessary to go into one's autobiography in order to explain a philosophical interest in this topic, and that the risks are precisely as the student notes, namely, that an admissions committee will draw unfair inferences about the student's ability to succeed.  What do readers think? 

Leave a Reply to Mentally Ill Grad Student Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

10 responses to “Disclosing mental health problems on an application in connection with philosophical interests related to those experiences”

  1. harry b

    I agree with your advice.
    More generally, as a frequent reader of personal statements I'd observe that i) much less hinges on them than students think, ii) they are excessively autobiographical and iii)they are too long. Word limits might be a good idea (same with writing samples, which are typically *much* too long).

    Reply
  2. Justin Fisher

    One potential option would be for the applicant to attribute his/her special interest to the fact that "a family member" has struggled with these issues. This is literally true, but flouts a Gricean maxim against using a longer locution when a shorter one ("I myself") would have been more informative. However, the applicant has no obligation to be informative about his/her own medical history, so I think flouting that maxim is defensible in this case.

    Sadly, there is some risk that admissions committees will have some stigma against having mental illness in one's family, though probably much less than they would have against having it oneself. I'm not sure whether or not this risk is outweighed by the practical advantages of portraying oneself as having a special passion for and familiarity with one's proposed topic of study.

    There may also be some risk that admissions committees will speculate that the applicant might actually mean "I myself", especially if they've read this post (sorry!). Again, I'm not sure whether or not this risk is outweighed by the potential practical benefits.

    Reply
  3. JS

    I had a slightly similar experience so maybe this will help. I have an anxiety disorder. After some years of reflection on it I'm fairly sure this is why I have a knack for philosophy – I'm already worrying about everything anyway, so worrying about the minutiae of an argument is an easy next step (for example).

    Now, in applying to grad school I wanted to say something about why I thought I was a good philosopher. In my mind I was a good philosopher partly because of my anxiety (among other things, obviously). But I didn't want to mention my disorder for all the reasons you mentioned, and more (not wanting to be seen as attempting to score sympathy points, for example). For a not-insignificant amount of time I too thought this was a dilemma.

    Eventually though I realised that no matter how much 'explaining' my anxiety does when it comes to my being a good philosopher, there is plenty of stuff unrelated to my mental health which 'evidences' me being a good philosopher – grades, attendance at seminars, references, etc. etc. I can cite all these things as evidence of me being a good philosopher, even if I hold back on saying that I think this fact is explained by my mental health. If my grades, writing samples, attendance etc. all point towards me being good I doubt any one cares for the historical 'but why?' explanation.

    I imagine something similar is true for you. I'm sure you can demonstrate an interest in the philosophy of mental health without having to actually say 'why' you are interested. Maybe you've written papers on the topic, been to seminars, read books etc. Maybe your referees have discussed the topic with you. If you presented all that sort of stuff to me and said 'all of this shows I am interested in x' my response would probably be 'yes, you do seem interested in x'. I think I'd be unlikely to then ponder 'but why do they like x?'

    Maybe this is all a bit naive, and it doesn't address the point that you might be particularly desirable/capable as a candidate because of your ability to see the issue of mental health from a unique perspective, but it's how I rationalised a similar decision, so maybe it helps. All the best.

    Reply
  4. Mentally Ill Matt

    Two issues you face:

    (a) Previous grad student with similar disorder may have left a bad impression.

    (b) By labeling yourself, you're taking responsibility for the impression the faculty has of people with the disorder. You blow it, you may very well bias them. Not fair, but likely true.

    Keep it to yourself.

    Reply
  5. Les Green

    I agree with Brian. Note, moreover, that there are often members of admission (and hiring) committees who will in any case assume: that a philosopher interested in feminism is probably a woman, that a philosopher interested in race is probably from a minority, that a philosopher interested in sexuality is probably gay, that a philosopher interested in conservatism is probably right-wing, that a philosopher interested in disability is probably disabled, and that a philosopher interested in mental illness has probably been ill. When advising people (as opposed to commenting on or criticizing the features of the profession that lead people to thinks such facts relevant) I suggest that one leave all such 'personal' information off the statement or CV: "Idam dukkham". (And I'm actually *not* a Buddhist.)

    Reply
  6. Mentally Ill Matt

    I'm going to say something true but harsh that the folks who actually look at admissions can't say:
    Ceteris paribus (and maybe and even not entirely so), it's rational to favor someone without mental health (or just health) problems in admissions. Graduate programs have a strong interest in students finishing their degrees and getting jobs. (Mental) Health problems present an obstacle that affect the odds of this happening. And maybe there are laws that prevent discrimination on account of this, but I suspect it's hard for committee members to banish this information from their minds if they have it.

    Reply
  7. Some Other Person

    I think it would depend on the mental illness. Some are more worrying than others. I don't think anyone would be particularly concerned about, say, a disposition toward anxiety, but I think most people would be worried about someone who said they were a psychopath in order to explain their interest in psychopathy. I'd say that Borderline Personality Disorder is definitely more like psychopathy than anxiety in this way. BPD is thought by many to be associated with a host of anti-social and even threatening behaviours. In light of this, I'm not sure whether you should consider yourself obligated to tell others, or whether you should put your own interests first and keep it to yourself.

    Reply
  8. Mentally Ill Grad Student

    I'm going to add another vote to the "don't disclose anything" tally. There is really very little good that could come of it with respect to strengthening your statement and increasing your chances of admission. Furthermore, it's very risky. The bias towards the mentally ill is very real, even in the progressive enclave of academia. I don't know about the details of your illness, but I have the sort of issues that tend to make even the most progressive folks associate me more with raving homeless than a potentially successful academic — despite never exhibiting that sort of behavior. Even the best ones will treat you with "kid gloves" and you may find yourself passed over — more accurately, not even considered — for opportunities you might desire.

    When you disclose, if you disclose, I would only do so to trusted professors and only to the extent I felt comfortable. I would decidedly NOT make such disclosures in the impersonal medium of a personal statement. Frankly, I see no plausible upside to disclosure.

    Reply
  9. Mentally Ill Grad Student

    Well, I am sure about whether you should consider yourself obligated to tell others — you absolutely shouldn't.

    @SomeOtherPerson I'm not sure why you think OP might have an obligation to inform, and I'd be wary of suggesting a course of action with serious risks to OP without good reason. There is little evidence connecting BPD to increased danger to others — what little there is suggests that it is a small percentage of sufferers who pose such risk. The greatest danger a person with BPD poses is to themselves, as unfortunately self-harm and suicide are relatively common. Psychotic episodes are also not common in cases of BPD. The fact that it is "thought by many [who?] to be associated with…threatening behaviours" does not provide reason for OP to disclose, but the harms such thoughts cause to those with BPD provides reason for these "many" to correct their mistaken and pernicious beliefs.

    I realize the tone of this is somewhat harsh, but this is just the sort of thing that makes being a sufferer of one of these socially stigmatized disorders that much harder. For example, despite the fact that violence among schizophrenics is rare — and inflated by the actions of a very small subgroup — schizophrenics are still painted as dangerous individuals. Unfortunately, the fact that these damaging stereotypes are directed at the mentally ill rather than, e.g., some racial minority, seems to block the realization that these broad stroke assessments of a group of people amounts to little more than bigotry.

    Reply
  10. Michael B

    "Graduate programs have a strong interest in students finishing their degrees and getting jobs. (Mental) Health problems present an obstacle that affect the odds of this happening."

    There is no way to write this without seeming facetious so I hope you'll just trust me that I'm genuinely interested: what is the effect of mental health problems on the odds of finishing graduate degrees and getting jobs?

    I'm genuinely interested as a student of statistics, as an analyst in healthcare and as someone who has close contacts who suffer from poor mental health. Half of me thinks yes, it's plausible to say that the odds are lowered by some non-trivial amount; the other half of me thinks this is gross armchair prejudice. In either case, I have no data.

    —–
    KEYWORDS:
    Primary Blog

    Reply

Designed with WordPress