Also that the suicide rate among non-Mormons in Utah is significantly higher than that of Mormons in Utah.

I wouldn’t read too much significance into this study.

As a convert who does not live in Utah, I really can’t say from personal experience what I expect the deal to be. However, I do not believe that the Church is the source of all this depression. It is clear (to me at least) that there are many things that have to be taken into consideration before getting an accurate look at this subject.
Mormons aren’t perfect, and as far as I can tell we sure do not claim to be. Satan is hard at work. Still, it doesn’t take away from the fact that I know the Gospel has been restored and that the Church is true. I hope that we can all work to help alleviate the ills of society on those in Utah, members and non-members alike, as well as all across America in the places we live.

Just my two cents.

Oh, and I totally agree about the ice cream.

Mormons have every right to be happy. The people who AREN’T happy are the Catholics, Jews, Lutherans, Atheists, African-Americans (who may be anyone of the aforementioned religions, or even Mormon themselves) because they aren’t normal. I truly believe it has nothing to do with drugs or intra-religious pressure. It has to do with pressure from the Mormon community on everybody else in the state.

With the advances in medicine and all the great things that these advances have done to alleviate suffering and pain, it is unfortunate that prescription drug abuse has become so prevalent and is destroying so many lives. There always has to be opposition in all things I suppose.

#45 – “If we can pathologize sadness, say ‘I need an SSRI the way diabetics need insulin’ then there’s a way of eliciting some empathy from a community that might otherwise conclude that ‘unhappiness never was righteousness.’”

#48 – “recognizing that a clinical condition, which often is genetic, might be precluding the potential to experience joy”

Fwiw, the very first thought I had when I read the study about anti-depressant use in Utah was, literally, “Good. I hope Mormons use anti-depressants more than anyone else, given our doctrinal understanding of the Fall and the Atonement.”

My second son has diabetes. To function well (and truly to live a normal, productive life) he simply MUST take insulin regularly – and the dosage HAS to be regulated according to his own needs.

My mother has a rare form of schizophrenia. To function well (and truly to live a normal, productive life) she simply MUST take “sleeping pills” regularly and avoid stress generally – and her medicine HAS to be regulated according to her own needs.

Many people suffer from various levels of depression. To function well (and truly to live normal, productive lives) they simply MUST take anti-depressants – and their medicine HAS to be regulated according to their own needs.

Finally, every single one of the conditions I just described can be seen as a “weakness” that is the fault of the individual or, in religious terms, a natural result of the stuff we inherit as a result of The Fall. We aren’t held accountable for those natural results, since we didn’t choose them in the same way we choose to sin, but we are required to try to overcome our natural (wo)man and become more perfect (“complete, whole, fully developed”).

God help us all if we criticize others for using medicine that we are fortunate to have in order to mitigate the effects of The Fall in their own lives and, in a very real way change themselves from their natural (wo)man and become more like what we all want to be – in this case, truly happier and able to have joy.

“To my way of thinking, there is no direct relationship between church membership and those problems.” In the end, it seems we actually do agree.

Andrew, I think you’re right on the money.

There must be opposition in all things, so in fact, the church IS responsible for all happiness AND depression simultaneously.

My kettlecorn indeed is delicious, Doug, but I would say again.

It’s not the church’s duty to simply set up shop in an area (like, say, Utah) and then immediately become this beacon of awesomeness and positivity. So, one shouldn’t expect church influence to reduce these ills. Really, it depends on every person figuring out what they need to do to get themselves in order.

And it just depends on which side you’re on. Someone might immediately come after me and say that for people to “get themselves in order,” that means they aren’t following Commandments well enough and they need to get to that. But my position is that sometimes, the rigid doctrines of the church *aren’t* best for people (not including what’s often toxic CULTURE). So, really, depression rates or happiness rates or whatever aren’t a sign that the church is necessarily ineffective…we can’t know that from the data. It might be (if we are assuming that depression has no *uncontrollable* causes…which in all likelihood, it does) a sign that instead, INDIVIDUALS are ineffective.)

I’m good with a truce… Thanks

FWIW, I haven’t got an opinion about whether the church is even remotely accountable for depression rates, divorce rates, premarital sex, or even porn. My whole point on this thread was simply to show how many people in Utah are LDS and thereby show that LDS folks are not immune from society’s ills. To my way of thinking, there is no direct relationship between church membership and those problems. By the same token, it doesn’t appear that the church influence has helped to reduce these ills either. Just my opinion and worth what you’re paying for it…

God Bless

Andrew, how’s the popcorn? Kettlecorn I hope!

Of course, we just made the Freakonomics leap from correlation to causation, which is the underlying premise of articles like the one featuring this study.

See, wasn’t that easy?

My two cents…

It may not be Mormonism so much, as the natural collateral damage that comes with “community ideals”. Because Utah has a dominant religion, is somewhat isolated from neighboring states, and is still somewhat small (i.e. population), it may be the most “community-minded” state in the nation. One can imagine a “Utah community,” while one cannot imagine a big state like California having a somewhat homogenous community, or even a small state like Delaware.

Depression is not caused so much by lacking something, but by lacking something when your neighbor has something (tangible or intangible). It’s context. I might have the largest house in the country if I lived in Zimbabwe, but I feel inadequate with the same exact house living in Beverly Hills.

Utah’s “community ideals” are largely founded on religious ideals, but they affect both believers and non-believers. Non-believers, especially if they were once believers, face social stigma and possible friend/family alienation that could lead to depression, to say nothing of the anxiety and sadness that comes with losing one’s faith.

So I think there is something to Utah’s depression rate and Mormonism, but I don’t think it has anything specific to do with Mormonism itself… substitute any conservative religious or community ideal for Mormonism and you’d likely have the same results.

Just because I disagree with your math ability, doesn’t mean I think your conclusions are right or wrong. I think you’re reading things into my comments that I never said either. As for depression, I am undecided whether the church is to blame or not, but I know bad analysis when I see it. Perhaps the church does bear some responsibility for the high depression rate, but you taking pot shots at the church only weakens your arguments, IMO, and certainly breeds some sarcasm.

I’ll call for a truce. No hard feelings, ok?

You on the other hand are a different matter all together Mr. Heretic. This thread is about depression in Utah and whether or not church members are just as or more susceptible to the condition. Agreeing on the actual percentage of LDS members in the state is important to the discussion. It saddens me when people like you read a well referenced piece like getting the total population of Utah from the state’s own website and the total Utah church membership from the church’s own website and yet you still won’t admit you were wrong. On top of that, you know perfectly well that most active married members of the church have been sealed in the temple and that my very conservative estimate of 30% was doing your side a big favor.

What does all this show me? It tells me you’ll believe what you want to believe no-matter what evidence is placed in front of you. So my question to you is; why do you bother participating on this board? Check back in the posts here and you’ll find that when someone has proven me wrong about something, I’ve been big enough to admit it. I’ve even changed some of my firmly held beliefs in discussions with Ray and Bruce when I’ve seen they were right. Show me when you’ve done something similar. If you check my original post on this thread you will see no backhanded swipes at the church or anyone else. I simply stated my opinion based on what I believed was good data. The slightly more aggressive tone comes in when we can’t even agree with basic facts that shouldn’t be dismissed so easily.

BTW, in reference to Ray’s explanation of membership clerks and incorrect data. I myself was a membership clerk for quite a while. I think the errors go both ways, there are certainly inactive people moving from the state without letting the church know, but there’s also inactive members moving into the state without letting the church know. I don’t think that type of error would amount to much of a difference in the final numbers and no-way it would equate to a 10% difference…

My comment was supposed to be a good natured ribbing. I was referring to Doug’s comment #30, 3rd paragraph which seems like he is taking quite a liberty with some numbers, and then he says in comment #70, that he can’t trust someone else’s math. Seems a lot like calling the pot kettle black to me.

But Ray’s right–I’m not trying to tick anybody off, just draw attention to suspect math/statistics.

I know your comment was a good-natured joke, and Doug’s use of those stats was a back-handed slap at the Church, but still . . . I don’t want anyone taking their ball and going home.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090311/ap_on_re_us/states_of_happiness