GP / Blog / Society & Culture

Issue briefing

Mental health, wellbeing and whose responsibility it is

Wellbeing has only ever entered the GP paper sideways, through humour in 2024. As an issue in its own right it is a near-empty slot, which is exactly why it is worth preparing.

Theme · Society & CultureLast set at A-Level · 2024 (obliquely, on whether humour is essential to wellbeing; never as a standalone mental-health stem)SEAB sets the paper

In short

A wellbeing question rewards a student who treats 'mental health' as contested ground, not a slogan. Argue whether the crisis is as large as claimed, and where responsibility sits between the individual, the family, the school and the state. Resist the urge to be only sympathetic; be analytical.

Why this could come up now

This is a genuine gap. The closest the A-Level has come is the 2024 question on humour and wellbeing, which touched the theme without naming it. A direct mental-health stem has not appeared, even as the topic dominates public life.

The contemporary pressure is unmistakable. The same youth-social-media debate that is driving bans abroad is framed almost entirely around mental health, which keeps wellbeing in the news an examiner reads.

Honestly framed: an empty slot is not a sign that it fills this year. It is a reason to be ready, because if it comes, most candidates will reach for sympathy and stall, and a calibrated answer will stand out.

201420172020202120242025

set at A-Level most recent appearance. Almost untouched directly. A dormant slot with rising real-world pressure behind it.

What an essay on this would test

A wellbeing question tests whether you can think about a sensitive subject without collapsing into platitudes. The examiner wants argument: is the reported surge a real worsening, or partly better awareness and reporting? Both can be true, and saying how they combine is the skill.

It also tests allocation of responsibility. Wellbeing is shaped by individual habits, family, schools, workplaces, social media and the state at once. A strong answer decides where the weight should sit and defends that, rather than vaguely blaming everyone.

Operative angles

crisis: is the scale real, or partly a reporting and awareness effect, or both
responsibility: individual habits versus structural causes versus state duty
wellbeing versus mental illness: a question may mean either, and conflating them weakens the answer

How to answer it: two ways in

Two distinct, defensible routes through the question. A strong script commits to one and uses the other as the concession it answers, rather than sitting on the fence.

Cause: structural

Wellbeing is shaped by conditions, not just choices

Treating wellbeing as a personal project lets the real drivers off the hook: overwork, competition, housing cost and platform design that profits from anxiety.

Telling stressed students to meditate while leaving a high-pressure system intact addresses the symptom and ignores the cause.
Where states judged the structural harm serious, they regulated rather than advising individuals to cope better.
Awareness campaigns without changed conditions can even add a second burden: now you are anxious and responsible for fixing it alone.

Worked exampleAustralia's decision to ban under-16s from social media, rather than urge teenagers to self-regulate, treats youth mental health as a structural problem caused by platform design, not a failure of individual willpower (Australian government, as of 2026-06).

Cause: agency

Resilience and habit still matter

Structural causes are real, but a purely structural story strips people of agency and ignores the habits, relationships and meaning that genuinely protect wellbeing.

Sleep, exercise, friendship and purpose remain among the strongest protectors of wellbeing, and they are partly within reach.
A culture that treats every difficulty as a structural injury can teach fragility rather than coping.
Over-medicalising ordinary unhappiness risks both stretching scarce care and telling people they are ill when they are struggling.

Worked exampleThe 2024 A-Level question on whether humour is essential to wellbeing points at exactly this: that ordinary human resources, here laughter, do real protective work, and that wellbeing is not only something done to us (A-Level GP 2024, paraphrased, as of 2026-06).

The fuel: stats, facts and examples

Dec 2025

Australia's under-16 social media ban took effect, justified primarily on youth mental health grounds

Source: Australian government (eSafety Commissioner) · as of 2026-06

4.7m

youth accounts closed under that ban by Jan 2026, a measure of how seriously one state took the harm

Source: Australian government via Al Jazeera · as of 2026-06

Facts worth deploying

The global policy turn on youth social media is framed overwhelmingly as a mental-health intervention, which is why a wellbeing question now has hard, dateable evidence behind it.Source: Australian government / international coverage, as of 2026-06

Singapore has expanded national mental health support, including a single mental health hotline and tiered community care, signalling the state now treats wellbeing as public infrastructure.Source: Singapore Ministry of Health, as of 2026-06

Part of the reported rise in mental-health difficulty reflects better awareness and less stigma, so the data measures both more illness and more honesty at once.Source: general public-health consensus, as of 2026-06

FAQ

Is this too sensitive to argue both sides?

You can be humane and still analytical. Arguing that wellbeing has both structural and personal causes is not callous; it is accurate. What you avoid is glibness, not seriousness. Treat the people as real and the argument as genuine.

What if the question is about a healthy lifestyle, not mental health?

The same skeleton works. The live tension is individual responsibility versus the state and environment, whether the body or the mind is the subject. The 2025 healthy-lifestyle question and a mental-health question share an argument.

Can I cite statistics on depression rates?

Only if you can source and date them, and only carefully, since reported rates mix real change with better reporting. It is often stronger to argue the awareness-versus-worsening distinction than to lean on a single shaky figure.