I can't believe I'm defending Tom Cruise.
But someone has to do it. Cruise has been criticized and ridiculed
after a heated exchange with "Today" show co-host Matt Lauer
the other day over a rather important topic: the possible overuse of
prescription drugs that supposedly treat depression or other forms of
mental illness.
It all started when Lauer came to the rescue of Brooke Shields,
who — while promoting a book — disclosed that she had therapy
and took antidepressant drugs to combat postpartum depression.
Cruise doesn't believe in psychiatry ("a pseudo science")
or antidepressants ("mind-altering, antipsychotic drugs"),
and he said as much after Shields made her remarks.
Lauer thought that Cruise was being judgmental, and that he should
keep his opinions to himself. He also thought Cruise should stipulate
that — while the actor didn't approve of taking antidepressants
— those for whom the drugs had worked should be free to take them.
Why should Cruise keep his opinions to himself? Shields didn't keep
her bout with mental illness to herself. She advertised it to sell
books. Cruise is entitled to his opinion, just like anyone else.
The problem isn't that celebrities have opinions. It's that the rest
of society is quick to treat them as experts. They're not experts.
They're movie stars with opinions. And they should be free to express
their opinions, and the rest of us should be free to discount them if
they don't hold up.
But Lauer seemed to be saying that Cruise didn't have a right to his
opinion because many people — like the millions of Americans who
use prescription drugs — might find it offensive.
Cruise held his ground. He didn't just give in to Lauer's brand of
"I'm OK, you're OK" psychobabble. When asked if it was OK if
drugs worked for Shields, Cruise said, no, it wasn't.
"I disagree with it," he told Lauer.
Cruise suggested vitamins and exercise as a viable alternative and
said drugs only "mask the problem."
I enjoy a good fight. How many other celebrities — in the same
situation — would have caved in and said whatever they thought the
interviewer wanted to hear?
Instead, Cruise kicked off a debate over a subject that a lot of
people don't feel comfortable discussing: whether Americans are too
quick to turn to prescription drugs and whether their doctors are too
quick to prescribe them. Cruise zeroed in on "drugging children"
with Ritalin, which is supposed to treat hyperactivity or
attention deficit disorder.
That's a hugely important discussion, and it shouldn't matter who
gets the ball rolling. Even if the push comes from a — gasp —
celebrity, and one who has links to — gasp — Scientology.
So far the public isn't buying it. According to an online poll by
MSNBC, 69 percent of viewers said Cruise was "just plain wrong"
on the role of doctors and the use of drugs to alleviate mental distress.
Those people are naive. My friends who are doctors tell me that they
are constantly being lobbied by drug companies, trying to convince them
to prescribe some of this and more of that.
Could this have anything to do with the economic incentives and perks
that drug companies offer doctors and hospitals? What do you think?
That's the discussion we need to be having. And if it's finally under
way, it is no thanks to the scores of newspaper reporters and
radio talk show hosts who piled on Tom Cruise. After watching the
interview and the reaction, I felt embarrassed — not for Cruise,
but for many of my colleagues in the media.
All of a sudden, the issue went from being about drugs to being about
celebrity and Scientology. Talk show hosts in Southern California
ribbed "Dr. Cruise" for thinking that he knows anything about
psychiatry. A writer for The Washington Post joined in, asking:
"Should we address him as Dr. Tom Cruise from now on? Or will the
Rev. Dr. Cruise suffice?" And how's this for a headline from one
online newspaper: "Tom Cruise 'Today Show' Scientology Rant Hurts
Image."
What Scientology rant? The guy was talking about — or rather
trying to talk about — our society's increasing dependence on
mind-altering and mood-altering drugs. And at no point in the interview
did he even attribute those views to his religion.
Do you suppose it's possible for an entire profession — in this
case, the news media — to suffer from attention deficit disorder?
The problem is that Tom Cruise raised a serious issue, one that
deserves serious attention.
Navarrette can be reached via e-mail at
ruben.navarrette@uniontrib.com.
Source:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/op-ed/navarrette/20050629-9999-lz1e29navaret.html
