Rumors of 19 year old females going on missions

[CardiacCoug]

Maybe abruptly and completely cutting off contact with everyone and everything you love, in a foreign country (or at least place), with a companion you may or may not have anything in common with but have to spend 24/7 with nonetheless, to knock on doors and tell people with much more life experience than you how to better live theirs, 12 hours a day 6.5 days a week, is not particularly conducive to good mental health.

I think mentally healthy people will get through a mission just fine, but it definitely unmasks mental illness in a lot of kids. Part of it is that it's the age when bipolar disorder, depression, and schizophrenia often arise, and definitely part of it is those stresses that you mention.

Mental health professionals in Utah County are really busy taking care of missionaries who had very significant mental illnesses on the mission. Of course going away to college often unmasks underlying mental illness, too -- any stressful life change can do it obviously (e.g. post-partum depression -- with sleep deprivation playing a big contributing role).

I had a companion who had clinical depression and really couldn't deal with oppressive feelings of guilt on his mission. We would walk by a family on the sidewalk and a few seconds later he would say stuff like "Dang, I was prompted that I was supposed to talk to them and I didn't do it."

[CardiacCoug]

One year away from home at school is one of the best kinds of experience for a prospective missionary.

Sure, I agree completely. But if FM's point is that the lifestyle change required to be a missionary now is a helluva lot greater than it was 20 years ago then I agree with him, too.

I remember thinking as a missionary that only somebody who had a really shitty pre-mission life could enjoy this.

[ERCougar]

I think mentally healthy people will get through a mission just fine, but it definitely unmasks mental illness in a lot of kids. Part of it is that it's the age when bipolar disorder, depression, and schizophrenia often arise, and definitely part of it is those stresses that you mention.

Mental health professionals in Utah County are really busy taking care of missionaries who had very significant mental illnesses on the mission. Of course going away to college often unmasks underlying mental illness, too -- any stressful life change can do it obviously (e.g. post-partum depression -- with sleep deprivation playing a big contributing role).

I had a companion who had clinical depression and really couldn't deal with oppressive feelings of guilt on his mission. We would walk by a family on the sidewalk and a few seconds later he would say stuff like "Dang, I was prompted that I was supposed to talk to them and I didn't do it."

What you're describing in the last paragraph is almost textbook appropriate behavior to some.
So I disagree with you a little here. I've been fortunate to never struggle with depression...except for the first 6-12 months of my mission. Of course, at the time, I had no idea what was going on, being a 19 yr old who ate up everything fed to me in the MTC, particularly the ETB quote about losing myself in my mission and that all my personal cares would slip away. It wasn't until medical school when I studied depression that I realized that I had been clinically depressed. I doubt my companions or president ever even knew because I hid it pretty well and "lost myself in the work", which is a functional way to deal with it to an extent, but in the mission setting can easily become a dysfunctional way.
I had spent a year away (out of state) in college and I had spent a good portion of nearly every summer through high school away from home in various pursuits. I was in my dream country (France) and I had taken a lot of French before my mission and really didn't struggle with the language. I had never struggled with depression before and I never really have since, despite being in some pretty stressful situations, so I disagree that mentally healthy people do just fine on missions. Sure, if I had had a much more mature outlook on the Gospel and my role as a missionary, I may have gotten along better, but I was nineteen. Very few have that sort of perspective at that age, and if they do, it's often beaten out of them in the MTC language of obedience to the white handbook above all. I just think a mission is a very specific kind of stressor and I was uniquely susceptible to it at a pretty young age. I also think some of those stressors just aren't necessary to the missionary experience.

[FMCoug]

Thank you all for making my case. A 19-yr-old can be significantly more ready for a mission than an 18-yr-old. One year away from home at school is one of the best kinds of experience for a prospective missionary.

By FM's logic, the recent bump in early returns has nothing to do with the age change. Rather, there has been some sudden surge in helicopter parenting.

I'll give you the recent bump. But the increase has been a problem since long before the age change. I know for a fact it was something the Missionary department was looking into at least 5 years ago, if not longer.

[Topper]

A year of college makes a world of difference.

[Jacob]

Nope. The potential mental health pitfalls seem a little obvious to me, but maybe that's my advanced psychiatry training.

I don't know that it's an overall negative mental healthwise, but if you're losing 10+% of your participants and that number worries you, then there are a few tweaks you could make. Or not.

I admit to having little-to-no experience with mental health problems. Your post just seemed like you were making a claim that was obviously true, when it was not at all obvious to me. A few points. Do we know for sure there has been a surge in people leaving their missions for mental health reasons? Is the number anywhere near 10%? If there are substantial numbers leaving purportedly due to mental health issues, do we know what percentage of them are really mental health issues? (I'm sure they can all be classified as mental health, but many likely amount to "I really don't like this").

But the points you made were that the typical missionary life, as it has existed for the past several decades is an obvious cause of mental health issues, when most of us didn't see that when we were actually there. Maybe your advanced psychiatric training has led you to conclude that Mormon missionary service is just plain bad for mental health. That seems like an obviously faulty claim to me.

PS: those declaring that everyone should just go to college for a semester or a year before mission service seems a little absurd to me. First off, 50% or more of the potential missionaries shouldn't be going to college. What do to with them? To those of you who felt homesick at college, a few miles from home, that's a shame. But you got over it and I can't imagine why you wouldn't be able to get over it on a mission as well as at college. Excuse my ignorance. I never felt homesick at college or on the mission.

PPS: I chuckled a little when someone said that their recent missionaries were "exceptionally immature." Aren't most 18 year old boys exceptionally immature? Maybe they were just exceptionally immature for missionaries, but typically mature for 18 year olds.

PPPS: I don't care when youth go on missions. The church should probably do what it thinks best fulfills its objectives, whether those objectives lean more towards converting others, or creating life-long devotees of their youth. They should just be straight forward about what those objectives are. I always thought the only reason for the service was to convert others, and I treated my service in that manner. I'm not so sure I was completely right. I know many missionaries don't get the chance to convert many, or any, so the leadership must also have some other purpose in mind. I believe the decision to send 18 year old men and 19 year old women was largely a pragmatic rather than a revealed decision. I think they ought to be straightforward about that as well.

[TripletDaddy]

i thought the convention was to add alternating Ps and Ss, as opposed to only adding Ps?

[Commando]

PPS: I chuckled a little when someone said that their recent missionaries were "exceptionally immature." Aren't most 18 year old boys exceptionally immature? Maybe they were just exceptionally immature for missionaries, but typically mature for 18 year olds.

I'm not the one who said it, but I whole heartedly agree. Maybe it's just that we're seeing a bigger sample, but some of the sisters I've run into (and wow there are a grip of sisters- it seems like I hardly see Elders anymore) seem like these shy, mousy, socially backwards girls who can't string together a cogent gospel message rather than the confident, earnest troopers I would stereotype sister mish's as being.

[falafel]

i thought the convention was to add alternating Ps and Ss, as opposed to only adding Ps?

Post-script. Post-post-script.

[falafel]

I'm not the one who said it, but I whole heartedly agree. Maybe it's just that we're seeing a bigger sample, but some of the sisters I've run into (and wow there are a grip of sisters- it seems like I hardly see Elders anymore) seem like these shy, mousy, socially backwards girls who can't string together a cogent gospel message rather than the confident, earnest troopers I would stereotype sister mish's as being.

We seem to be losing sisters. Or they are being transferred to areas of the mission I never see. We currently have sisters in our ward, and they are being double-transferred somewhere and the area is being turned over to elders.

[Uncle Ted]

i thought the convention was to add alternating Ps and Ss, as opposed to only adding Ps?

No, the convention here is if you have something more to add or otherwise edit your post is to write "Edit:". If you need to add or edit further you should use "Edit #:" where # is 2, 3, 4, 5 and so on.

[Jacob]

i thought the convention was to add alternating Ps and Ss, as opposed to only adding Ps?

I couldn't figure it out. I did a quick google search before posting, but didn't want to waste more than a few seconds. Can I get a ruling? I'm pretty sure PPS is correct, but don't know what to do after that other than avoid adding another end note.

[Jacob]

No, the convention here is if you have something more to add or otherwise edit your post is to write "Edit:". If you need to add or edit further you should use "Edit #:" where # is 2, 3, 4, 5 and so on.

It wasn't an edit.

[imanihonjin]

We seem to be losing sisters. Or they are being transferred to areas of the mission I never see. We currently have sisters in our ward, and they are being double-transferred somewhere and the area is being turned over to elders.

Do you only have one set of missionaries in your ward? If so, count yourself lucky.

[old_gregg]

No, the convention here is if you have something more to add or otherwise edit your post is to write "Edit:". If you need to add or edit further you should use "Edit #:" where # is 2, 3, 4, 5 and so on.

not starting with edit 0? keep showing your true colors, pal