Mental Health in Times of COVID-19

Abstract Over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, the concept of health has been continuously made public from many different perspectives in the Netherlands. Health has been conceptualised and articulated both as public and individual and both as physical and mental. This research focuses mainly on the mental health of young adults, and the ways in which this is addressed separately and in relation to each other by two opposing actors, namely the Dutch government and organisations representing young adults. In this research, the theoretical framework explores relevant concepts by drawing on academic research on the notion of health and the essence of government communication in relation to COVID-19. A wide range of data was gathered for this research, including official transcripts from press conferences during the pandemic by the Dutch government, as well as publications on mental health from organisations that represent young adults. A discourse analysis ensured a largely contextual research process, where data was analysed against the theory as well as against the situational contexts of the pandemic. This research found large differences in the ways that the Dutch government and civil society articulated mental health of young adults in the Netherlands during the pandemic. The accessibility of data already showcased a large power asymmetry in the agency possessed by both parties to publicize data. The conceptions of health also showed large differences, revealing prioritization of one interpretation of health over the other. The narrative used in the communication demonstrated not only differences for both parties, but also exposes underlying motivations of the communication practice. Lastly, young adults as a demographic group were unequally addressed and considered too, mainly as a consequence of the aforementioned factors. Hence, this research on the articulation of mental health among young adults in the Netherlands explores how the Dutch government is communicating with the intention to govern the society, whereas civil society is making public what is missing in this articulation of the issue.