Mental Health Crisis in Canada and Racial Narrowing
What Is Racial Narrowing?
Racial narrowing is a practice where a problem that affects many people is redefined or presented as primarily affecting one racial group, even though the underlying issue is broader. In other words, instead of treating an issue as universal, attention is narrowed to race.
Racial narrowing can happen through:
Narrative Framing — explaining causes in racial terms rather than structural or universal ones.
Selective Emphasis — highlighting cases from one racial group while ignoring others.
Policy Design — applying solutions or enforcement mainly to one group.
Why it is used?
People or institutions may use racial narrowing to simplify complex issues, avoid broader accountability, mobilize political support, or fit legal or policy categories that are race-based.
Why it can be problematic?
Racial narrowing can misrepresent the true scope of a problem, increase division between groups, lead to unequal treatment or enforcement, and obscure non-racial causes like class, policy design, or incentives.
How does it relate to mental health crisis in Canada?
Racial narrowing targets visible minorities in Canada by disproportionately assigning labels of “mental illness” based not on medical evidence, but on racialized identity characteristics and social disadvantages. This process reduces complex social, cultural, and structural issues into individualized diagnoses, reinforcing racial bias within mental health systems. The following factors are commonly used as grounds to pathologize immigrants and racialized communities:
Language and Communication Barriers — Miscommunication resulting from limited proficiency in English or French is often interpreted as cognitive impairment, confusion, or disordered thinking. Accents, pauses, indirect speech patterns, or unfamiliar expressions may be incorrectly perceived as symptoms of mental illness rather than linguistic difference.
Projection of Overseas Conflicts into the Canadian Context — Economic, political, or social conflicts experienced in an immigrant’s country of origin are sometimes framed as personal psychological instability once the individual is in Canada. For example, ongoing concern about political unrest or economic hardship in one’s home country may be treated as paranoia or anxiety disorders, rather than as rational responses to lived experiences.
Spiritual and Religious Beliefs — Culturally specific spiritual beliefs may be misunderstood through a Western psychiatric lens. For instance, believing in God as a present or communicative entity may be incorrectly interpreted as experiencing visual or auditory hallucinations. Spiritual practices that fall outside dominant Western norms are frequently medicalized instead of culturally contextualized.
Anatomy and Physical Appearance — Differences in physical features, such as skull shape or other anatomical characteristics of immigrant groups, have historically been linked to assumptions about intellectual or mental inferiority. These pseudo-scientific ideas continue to influence racial bias, reinforcing harmful associations between physical traits and mental illness.
Physical Activity and Play — The normal physical activity and play of children from immigrant and racialized communities may be misinterpreted as dangerous or pathological behavior. In some cases, routine activities such as running, climbing, or rough-and-tumble play are framed as potential causes of brain injury or neurological damage without medical evidence. These interpretations often reflect cultural bias rather than legitimate concern, leading to unnecessary scrutiny of families and further racialization of childhood behavior.
Religious and Cultural Practices — Visible religious expressions, such as wearing a hijab, may be inaccurately labeled as signs of paranoia, oppression, or psychological distress. Traditional family or cultural practices such as cousin relationships or close-knit caregiving structures may be misread as indicators of neglect, abuse, or malnourishment rather than culturally grounded norms.
Collectively, these factors demonstrate how immigrants and visible minorities are often “diagnosed” with mental illness based on racialized interpretations rather than clinical assessment. This practice narrows the understanding of mental health in Canada by framing a broader national mental health crisis through race, culture, and identity, rather than addressing systemic inequalities, access barriers, and social determinants of health.
Unfortunately, we are witnessing an alarming trend in which an increasing number of immigrants and visible minorities are being labeled as mentally ill in clinical settings despite a lack of scientific evidence supporting their diagnoses. This situation becomes even more concerning when reports emerge of officials openly threatening to administer experimental drugs to patients detained in psychiatric wards across Canada. We strongly warn the Canadian government to immediately cease the practice of racial narrowing and to abandon outdated and scientifically meaningless psychiatric diagnoses and treatments. Failure to do so risks deepening mistrust in public institutions and accelerating social fragmentation within Canadian society.
The issue of psychiatric detention and forced psychiatric treatment has affected Canadians for decades, particularly during periods when the population was far less diverse and predominantly of European descent. Over these decades, large numbers of Canadians have been subjected to psychiatric interventions, and those with long-standing familiarity with the mental health system are often better positioned to recognize patterns of mistreatment, systemic failure, and rights violations than newly arrived individuals. However, rather than confronting this deeply rooted and historically documented problem, the government appears to shift responsibility away from institutional accountability. By employing racial narrowing, systemic failures in mental health care are reframed as a recent problem allegedly introduced by non-European immigrants and visible minorities, despite mental health crises being a long-standing phenomenon.
This reframing serves to minimize liability and public scrutiny, including the risk of large-scale legal action, while disproportionately burdening immigrants and racialized communities who may lack political power, legal familiarity, or social protection. Such an approach not only distorts the historical reality of psychiatric practices in Canada but also further victimizes immigrants and visible minorities by portraying them as the source of a national problem rather than as its subjects. This represents a clear and troubling example of racial narrowing that must be addressed promptly and seriously, both to prevent continued marginalization of racialized communities and to confront the genuine, decades-long challenges within Canada’s social fabric.
No Responses