Slashdot Mirror
'Nature' Explores Why So Many Postgrads Have Bad Mental Health (nature.com)
An anonymous reader writes:
This week Nature tweeted that the rates of depression and anxiety reported by postgraduate students were six times higher than in the general population -- and received more than 1,200 retweets and received 170 replies. "This is not a one dimensional problem. Financial burden, hostile academia, red tape, tough job market, no proper career guidance. Take your pick," read one response. "Maybe being told day in, day out that the work you spend 10+ hrs a day, 6-7 days a week on isn't good enough," said another.
The science magazine takes this as more proof that "there is a problem among young scientists. Too many have mental-health difficulties, and too many say that the demands of the role are partly to blame. Neither issue gets the attention it deserves." They're now gathering stories from postgraduates about mental-health issues, and vowing to give the issue more coverage. "There is a problem with the culture in science, and it is one that loads an increasing burden on the shoulders of younger generations. The evidence suggests that they are feeling the effects. (Among the tweets, one proposed solution to improving the PhD is to 'treat it like professional training instead of indentured servitude with no hope of a career at the end?'.)"
The science magazine takes this as more proof that "there is a problem among young scientists. Too many have mental-health difficulties, and too many say that the demands of the role are partly to blame. Neither issue gets the attention it deserves." They're now gathering stories from postgraduates about mental-health issues, and vowing to give the issue more coverage. "There is a problem with the culture in science, and it is one that loads an increasing burden on the shoulders of younger generations. The evidence suggests that they are feeling the effects. (Among the tweets, one proposed solution to improving the PhD is to 'treat it like professional training instead of indentured servitude with no hope of a career at the end?'.)"
The lie is that a 22 year old kid fresh out of school can become an effective scientist by staying in school some more. This is false.
It's demonstraby true, since the majority of effective scientists have actually done this.
and more importantly, you have no idea what avenues of research are actually interesting to the world at large
Neither does the world at large. Your supervisor wil be some guide but ultimately open research is a scattershot approach. Much will come to nothing. Some wil make a huge difference, but it can take decades.
The result is that if you go straight through, as you are encouraged to by all your professors, you have no aim, you have no real work ethic, and you have no adulthood. And you don't find out until you're in your mid twenties, adrift in your research, have no savings, and have had limited opportunities to gain the confidence of having exercised basic adult skills that you might have made a mistake.
Speak for yourself. Not all of us were as useless as you.
SJW n. One who posts facts.