Human rights, in practice, can feel more aspirational than guaranteed.
Under the United Nations definition, human rights are meant to apply to everyone, regardless of race, religion, sex, nationality, or ethnicity, including the right to life and healthcare, freedom from slavery and torture, the right to work and to education, and the right to freely express one’s views. These are, in principle, sound foundations for equality and human dignity. In practice, the picture is far less consistent.
Many people around the world wake up with ready access to these rights, while others have little to none. Outlining a right on paper serves little purpose if it is not backed by meaningful implementation, and in truth, most countries fall short of fully upholding all of them. Some governments have prioritised their own interests over those of their citizens, and political repression remains far from a historical footnote. As long as corruption, authoritarian rule, and inaction persist, human rights remain aspirational for a significant part of the world’s population rather than a lived reality, closer to a distant ideal than something within reach. That gap has understandably left many communities sceptical that these rights apply to them at all, particularly where international bodies have struggled to translate stated ideals into consistent action.
Mental health has historically sat low on the list of priorities in policy, law, and reform, which likely explains why it was largely absent from early conceptions of basic human rights. Physical health has long received far more attention in terms of funding and medical education, while mental health has faced a much harder path shaped by stigma and limited understanding. More recently, however, the World Health Organization redefined health as “a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being, and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity,” a definition that has helped bring mental wellbeing more clearly into the conversation around basic rights.
Human rights violations take a real toll on mental health. Having one’s freedom restricted, in ways that have become normalised in some parts of the world, is more than enough to contribute to the onset of mental illness. With roughly one in four people globally experiencing a mental health condition at some point in their lives, there is a strong case for shifting focus towards fulfilling these rights properly, including ensuring mental health services are genuinely available and accessible. In many places, the imbalance between physical and mental health provision leaves people simply unable to access the support they need. In some regions, psychiatric institutions have historically been the only form of available care, and have at times violated the very rights they were meant to protect. A limited understanding of mental illness has, in the past, led to serious mistreatment of patients, denial of privacy, and exclusion from decisions about their own care, on the assumption that they were incapable of making such decisions for themselves. Institutions built to offer security and support have, in some cases, become sources of harm instead, through practices such as forced seclusion, coercive treatment, and abuse.
These outdated practices stand in stark contrast to community based, rights respecting approaches to care. Before solutions can be meaningfully considered, the rights of each individual must be properly understood. Patients deserve autonomy and dignity in their treatment, including the right to decline treatment without being labelled incapable for doing so. The underlying aim should always be genuine support, since seclusion and isolation tend to be counterproductive, often deepening anxiety, stress, and fear rather than easing them. A mental illness deserves the same consideration and protection as a visible physical one.
The priority now should be developing accessible, cost effective mental health care for the whole population. Poverty and mental health are closely linked, and the resulting economic strain can itself become a significant source of distress. For many people, mental health support remains out of reach simply because more immediate needs, food, shelter, income, take precedence. We need to serve the needs of those least able to access support, recognising that mental health, like other basic rights, should not remain out of reach for anyone. It needs to be embedded properly in policy and reform, followed through with real, visible action, so that public trust in the system can grow rather than continue to erode under the weight of promises that go unmet.
Mind Over Matter.
Disclaimer: This article is shared for general psychoeducational and informational purposes only. It does not constitute professional psychological, medical, or counselling advice, and is not a substitute for assessment, diagnosis, or treatment by a qualified mental health professional. If anything in this article raises concerns about your own wellbeing or that of someone you know, please reach out to a registered counsellor, psychologist, or your local emergency and crisis services. Where personal experiences are shared, names and identifying details have been omitted or changed to protect the privacy of those involved.