Arabic version: المزارعون يرفضون تسمية ‘المرونة’، ويشيرون إلى مخاوف الصحة النفسية
Farmers across Australia are expressing frustration over being labeled as ‘resilient’, a term they feel is overused and potentially harmful. According to ABC News, researchers and farmers agree that while resilience is a necessary trait in agriculture, the expectation of constant resilience can hinder their willingness to seek help.
Dr. Emily Buddle, a researcher at Adelaide University, surveyed female farmers and found a consensus that the term ‘resilient’ can create a perception that support is unnecessary. “They felt like they were being asked to be resilient so that … resources and support didn’t necessarily need to be there,” she stated. This expectation complicates the mental health landscape for farmers who may be struggling.
Stephanie Schmidt, a farmer and psychologist, voiced her discontent with the term, saying, “As farmers we are sick of being told that we are resilient and we’ll get through this, because sometimes we’re not. Sometimes it is incredibly hard.” This sentiment highlights the emotional toll that the label can impose, especially during challenging seasons.
Mental health advocate Warren Davies, known as The Unbreakable Farmer, echoed these concerns, stating that resilience often arises from a lack of options rather than being an inherent trait. He emphasized the need for farmers to build capacity and seek support rather than internalize their struggles under the guise of resilience.
The conversation around the term ‘resilient’ is evolving, with many calling for a more nuanced understanding of farmers’ experiences. As discussions continue, it is clear that the label, while well-intentioned, may need to be approached with caution to avoid further stigmatizing the mental health challenges faced by those in agriculture.
