In the recently released crime caper Forensic, a psychological thriller set in Mussoorie, psychologist Ranjana Gupta is a serial killer. Essayed by actress Prachi Desai, Gupta is shown to be a charming and unassuming woman who is enrolled as a child counselor in a school; her job is to establish communication channels with children and instill confidence in those who are unable to overcome their fears and anxieties. Instead, the climax shows her committing horrific crimes against little girls and killing them in cold blood on their birthdays. Such a negative portrayal of a mental health provider is utterly disturbing as it may further discourage parents and children from seeking help, thereby widening the gap between the provider and the seeker in a country where one out of five people require therapy at least once in their lives as per a government report.
Forensic is not the only movie guilty of such irresponsible, and negative portrayal of mental health providers. Of late, there have been a line-up of entertainment content across platforms, especially in cinema, where the role of the psychiatrist/psychologist has been reduced to someone who's ingenuine, conniving and in extreme cases, fearsome. Even though there have been many such films from the Bollywood stable that have dealt with the issue of mental health, it is the representation of the medical provider which has varied widely. Take for instance, the film Atrangi Re, which not only discusses the issue of mental health in a light-hearted way, but also trivialises the role played by therapists.
Hindi cinema industry or Bollywood has remained the face of Indian cinema for several decades, and over the years, we have learnt that any idea, thought, and message that is channelised through Bollywood, creates a long-lasting impression in society. In the past few decades, Hindi cinema has experimented extensively with the plot of mental illness, but the idea of mental illness and the understanding of who a mental health professional is, continue to remain controversial.
According to Ramakrishna Biswal from the National Institute of Technology, Rourkela, "The depiction of the mental health professional, mainly psychiatrist, in films such as Damini (1993), Dilwale (1994), and Kyon Ki (2005) were shown to be Mr Evil, unprofessional, insensitive, unscientific, apathetic, comic fillers and boundary violators. Patients in films released in the same era, such as Khilona (1970), Sadma (1983), Dilwale (1994) were shown to be childish, naive, violent, destructive, ignorant, reckless." When it comes to treatment methods, psychotropic medicines were shown as ineffective, mostly harming the patient, or as a tool for erasing memory. Psychiatrist performing lobotomy, which is no longer the treatment for a patient with severe mental illness, has been shown in the movie Kyon Ki. A wrong depiction of ECT has also created a widespread stigma among the community.
Then came a time when Bollywood started churning out films that beautifully depicted a patient’s struggle with self and also with society, and their accomplishments. "The therapist was represented more sensibly, with attributes such as sensitivity, empathy, and concern for the patient’s well-being. The depiction of an overt and covert message that the family is important in the patient’s path of recovery was a great leap the Hindi cinema had taken," says Biswal in a paper titled, 'Mental illness in Indian Hindi Cinema'. This was the phase following the earlier one, when films such as Taare Zameen Par (2007), Kartik calling Kartik (2010) and My Name is Khan (2010) were released. These films dealt with the portrayal of mental health professional in an “empathetic, polite, committed to help and and sensitive manner and the treatment method too, underwent a change with a focus on one-to-one intervention, inclusive of other stakeholders like family, community, workplace, etc.” In the next decade it was Dear Zindagi, seven years later in 2017 in which, observes Biswal, the story of an urban middle-class female suffering from depression, carefully brings scenes one by one where lifestyle adversities and flashback of childhood isolation put the protagonist into depression. The movie then advances by breaking stereotypical thoughts prevalent about patients with mental illness and the therapists. The movie is the first of its kind, which has correctly shown the therapeutic relationship between the mental health professional and the patient. A therapist, as a facilitator of the therapeutic process, comforts the client in a non-directive way than by giving advice or instructions.'
Then again, one is compelled to ask the question: does a therapist walk with a patient on the beach, in reality? Or would he or she have a scientific approach to it? That part seemed to be a flawed portrayal of psychologists and psychiatrists.
One of the most touching and memorable moments from the Hollywood film Joker is when a mentally low Joaquin Phoenix asks his psychiatrist why she never listens to him. Frustrated, he kills her. What emerges is the notion of just when one is desperate for a fair hearing, one cannot after all pour one's heart out at therapy, for, well, it might just not be heard for all you know! Psychologists and psychiatrists have been portrayed in hundreds of films for nearly a century. They are most often depicted as clinicians working in various settings such as psychiatric hospitals and mental health centers. Many recent films have included psychologists as lead characters. “Are these portrayals accurate? Are they improving? Are the age-old stereotypes subsiding,” asks Danny Wedding from Saybrook University in a paper titled, 'The Portrayal of Psychologists in Movies,' as he analyses the stereotypes and misconceptions that influence the public’s image of mental health professionals and how films churn out balanced and unbalanced portrayals.
Relatively little has been written on the portrayal of psychologists in films. Two of the most articulate scholars in this area, Glen Gabbard and Irving Schneider, are psychiatrists with strong ties to psychoanalysis. Both Gabbard and Schneider have documented that movies are often inaccurate in their portrayal of mental health professionals. “Direct effects include misconceptions about what actually happens in a therapy session. This can result in false or flawed expectations, diminished interest in seeking treatment, or decreased motivation. It also can prevent individuals who would benefit from therapy from seeking help. Films can also influence students who might be considering a career in a field such as clinical psychology,” said Gabbard who documented the negative correlation between the number of medical students specialising in psychiatry and negative public images of psychiatry in the media.
According to a 2011 research paper, titled, ' Portrayal of psychiatrists in Hindi movies released in the first decade of the 21st century' by Girish Banwari from the department of psychiatry at ESIC Model hospital in Ahmedabad, "there is dearth of systematic research that focuses specifically upon the depiction of psychiatrists in Hindi cinema.” He analysed 26 Hindi movies released between January 2001 and March 2010 portraying 33 ‘psychiatrist’ characters in a main or a secondary (but significant) role and concluded that, “The portrayal of psychiatrists in Hindi movies released in the first decade of the 21st century is unflattering. Hindi movies depicted psychiatrists as most likely to be male, middle-aged, and friendly in their attitude towards the patients. 42.4 per cent of them were clinically incompetent, and only 30.3 per cent could make an accurate diagnosis. 39.4 per cent of them breached professional ethics. Eight (24. 2 per cent) transgressed non-sexual boundaries, whereas five (15.2 per cent) violated both sexual and non-sexual boundaries. The most common clinical/treatment setting was outpatient (53.8 per cent), and pharmacotherapy was the most common treatment modality used. Treatment outcome was depicted positive in only 23.1 per cent of the movies analyzed.” “Indian cinema, an influential mass medium that enthralls millions across the country and outside, has a fantastic disconnectedness from reality,” writes Banwari.
"At least as far as the portrayal of psychiatrists is concerned, which continues to be caricatured, they are seen in negative light by the community, and popular cinema's distasteful depiction of psychiatrists may only perpetuate the prevalent negative perceptions. Media professionals often counter this allegation by claiming that media's portrayal only reflects what the masses want to see, and an accurate depiction usually does not sell," explains Banwari.
"Another aspect often seen is how films use the term psychiatrist to refer to what would more accurately be identified as a psychologist’s or a counsellor's role. There is also no contesting that Bollywood would have viewers believe that unethical behaviour or falling in love and having a relationship with one's counsellor is the norm in therapy. One film which caters to that kind of portrayal is Khamoshi (1969), in which Waheeda Rehman, a nurse attending to mentally challenged patients falls in love with Dharmendra's character, a patient," says Kalpana Swamy, content curator and Hindi film buff.
Several Hollywood films have cast real psychologists to play roles as film psychologists and that might be an important learning for those calling the shots in the Indian Hindi cinema. In One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest (1975) the role of the psychiatrist was played by Dean Kent Brooks, M.D., a bona fide psychiatrist who was serving as the head of the Oregon State Hospital in 1975 when the movie was filmed there.
