Mental-health prevalence among clinical professions

Summary for general readers

Read the conclusion first, then decide whether to continue into the specialist sections.

The doctors and psychologists who treat ordinary people’s psychiatric disorders also get depression themselves—and the rates are not low. Among comparable employed groups, they often sit in the highest band, not “far below ordinary people.”

Core figures (measures not fully identical; order-of-magnitude comparison only):

• Among U.S. employed workers across industries, lifetime diagnosed depression averages about 14.2%; health care and social assistance about 18.2%, near the top of industries.[9]
• Among resident physicians, current depression or depressive symptoms about 28.8%—roughly a 2× order relative to the industry average above—and still rising about 0.5 percentage points per year.[1]
• Among North American psychiatrists, depression spectrum (including mild) about 42.8%—about a 3× order.[4]
• Among counseling psychologists, about 62% report having experienced depression—about a 4× order.[5]

The more critical point: existing methods regarded as “scientific”—medication, psychotherapy, ECT, TMS, and the rest—have not stopped this profession from moving mild → moderate, moderate → severe, or severe → suicide. No step has been successfully intercepted.

Opening: ask one sharp question first

Do the doctors and psychologists who treat ordinary people’s psychiatric disorders get depression themselves? What are the prevalence rates, exactly?

Treating depression usually takes two paths: for mild–moderate cases, often a psychologist for counseling and psychotherapy; for moderate–severe cases, often a psychiatry specialty for medication.

So—using the methods they give patients, can they cure themselves? That is an extremely sharp question, and also a gold standard for measuring treatment effect.

Below, prevalence, anxiety and burnout, help-seeking and self-medication, and suicide-related signals from the public literature are laid out in full, in the literature’s order.

Opening case 1: Irvin D. Yalom & Victor Yalom

Irvin D. Yalom is a leading figure in existential psychotherapy. His books and clinical demonstrations shaped generations of counselors and psychiatrists. Many people treat the name “Yalom” almost as a symbol of the psychotherapy tradition itself.

In 2026, his son Ben Yalom confirmed on behalf of the family: another son, Victor Yalom—psychotherapist, founder of Psychotherapy.net, educator and artist—died by suicide in February 2026.

The family said Victor had periods of mental illness in his life; for nearly thirty years his creativity and career were strong; but in the past year the old illness returned, and he ultimately died by suicide.

They miss him deeply, ask people to hold close those they love, and direct memorial gifts to the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention (AFSP).

What cuts here is not gossip about a famous family. It is this: even a family standing at the very center of the psychotherapy tradition could not stop tragedy from falling on a practitioner.

It forces a question—are those who know the language and tools of treatment best really better able to protect themselves?

Opening case 2: Nolan Williams

In October 2025, another story struck just as hard: Stanford neuroscientist and physician-scientist Nolan Williams died at home on October 8, aged 43.

He was among the top scientists in psychiatric disease, pioneering several rapid treatments for severe psychiatric illness—including rapid TMS for depression and research directions involving ibogaine related to PTSD.[20]

It is painful, and it forces thought: how does a top expert devoted to advancing rapid treatment for severe psychiatric illness come to this? For psychiatry and the physician community, is this a single case—or the revealing of something more common?

A case cannot replace epidemiology, and cannot offer a simple explanation of any individual life. But take this question into the literature, and the results are startling.

Part I below presents the search results in full: depression incidence among doctors, psychiatrists, and psychologists in the U.S. and worldwide, plus anxiety, PTSD, and occupational burnout; and how doctors treat themselves, plus suicide-related signals.

I. Resident physicians: about 28.8% on average, and rising each year

A 2015 systematic review and meta-analysis by Douglas Mata and colleagues at Harvard Medical School, published in JAMA, screened more than three thousand related articles spanning roughly fifty-two years from January 1963 through September 2015, and retained 54 valuable studies for a meta-analysis of depression and depressive-symptom prevalence among physicians in residency training worldwide.

Of these, 35 were in North America, 9 in Asia, 5 in Europe, 4 in South America, and 1 in Africa. Total physicians covered: 17,560.

Across the 54 studies, prevalence ranged from 20.9% to 43.2%; on average 28.8% of residents had depression or depressive symptoms.

More important: over those fifty-two years, prevalence rose about 0.5 percentage points per year. U.S. residents 26.6%, other regions 31.1%; interns 31.9%, senior residents 26.6%.[1]

From a research standpoint, a meta-analysis is worth far more than a single paper. Single studies swing from a low of 20.9% to a high of 43.2%; after pooling, the signal is stable: this is not a chance event of one country, one scale, or one training stage.

28.8% is not “feeling down sometimes”; it is the share meeting study thresholds.

A rise of 0.5%/year shows that medical education, hospital systems, and mental-health knowledge have not stopped the problem from accumulating.

Residents are at the densest stage of knowledge input and the deepest clinical contact—if rates stay high and rising here, simply “knowing the disease name, the drugs, and the pathways” is not enough to form protection.

II. All clinical staff: depression about 33.8%, anxiety about 41.3%

The previous meta-analysis mainly covered young residents, not middle-aged and older doctors or all nurses, and cannot represent all healthcare workers.

A separate meta-analysis by Sialakis and colleagues in Greece: 9 countries, 14 papers, 7,780 doctors and nurses, ages from 20 into 50+. Results: depression 33.8%, anxiety 41.3%.[2]

Statistically, incidence splits into recent/current versus lifetime.

The two papers above cover internship/residency training and the COVID-19 period respectively—recent/current incidence on a one-to-three-year order, landing around 28.8%–33.8%.

Lifetime incidence among doctors is usually higher; the literature notes that lifetime incidence before retirement can reach an order of 50%+.

Clinical staff are not people who lack health knowledge. But when pressure truly enters the body and life, professional knowledge does not automatically become immunity.

III. Psychiatrists: would rates be lower instead?

Readers will naturally ask: the above is all doctors—are psychiatrists much lower?

Ping Dong and colleagues at Peking University surveyed Beijing psychiatrists during COVID in 2020–2021: 564 entered analysis. Depression 33.2%, anxiety 25.4%, occupational burnout 40.6%.[3]

A finer North American survey by Richard Summers and colleagues of 2,084 psychiatrists: mild depression 26.7%, moderate to severe 16.1%, combined depression-spectrum burden 42.8%; high occupational burnout about 78%.

Against a mid/late-career physician baseline, medical students and residents ran about 25% higher, early-career young physicians about 14% higher—cross-checkable with Mata’s intern/resident figure of about 28.8%.[4]

The conclusion matches those findings: from Beijing COVID and North American data, psychiatrists’ incidence is not below the average for all clinical staff—often higher.

Across a career, incidence remains highest among interns and residents, and falls somewhat with age—in the same direction as the age curve in the general population.

IV. Psychologists: those who treat others—how are they themselves?

Having covered prescribing doctors, turn to psychologists who provide counseling and psychotherapy.

A 2002 survey by Jennifer Murra and colleagues at the University of Northern Iowa of 425 APA Division 17 (counseling psychology) professionals: 62% classified themselves as having been depressed; of these, 78 (about 18.4%) had had suicidal ideation or behavior.[5]

Heavier still is the 2022 study by Sarah Victor and colleagues at Texas Tech University: 1,959 faculty, graduate students, and postdocs linked to clinical, counseling, and school psychology doctoral programs in the U.S. and Canada.

About 59.8% were doctoral students, 27.6% faculty.

Results: 47.5% had a formal mental-illness diagnosis; 34.8% had mental-health difficulties without a formal diagnosis; combined 82.2% had experienced mental-health difficulties—mainly depression, anxiety, and suicidal thoughts.

Data include both recent and lifetime measures.[6]

So are psychologists worse off than doctors? Ask further: relative to other employed industries, are clinical staff and psychologists in the worst band?

V. Cross-industry comparison: only against other employed people

Healthcare workers cannot be compared directly to “the general public.” Society includes minors and retirees: adolescent depression often runs high, retiree rates often low. Employed clinical staff can only be compared with employed people in other industries.

A June 2025 study by Aaron Sussell and colleagues, using the U.S. Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, assessed about 500,000 employed workers across 21 industries under a unified method—high comparability.

Doctors, nurses, and psychologists fall under Health care and social assistance.

That industry, with over 80,000 employed workers, showed lifetime prevalence of clearly diagnosed depression at 18.2%, ranking 2nd among industries; 1st was accommodation and food services at 18.4%, 3rd arts/entertainment/recreation at 17.2%; lowest was mining at 6.7%; all-industry average 14.2%.[9]

Some will question: how accurate are cross-industry surveys?

Harvey and colleagues at UNSW discussed this specifically in The Lancet in 2021: other occupation surveys often inflate symptoms because of “job dissatisfaction”; physician data are relatively accurate.[12] the literature further notes: in the search, physician figures often even run low—reasons in the later section on concealment and help-seeking barriers.

From this one may conclude: depression incidence among doctors, nurses, and psychologists sits in the highest band among comparable industries.

In the literature above, anxiety, occupational burnout, and PTSD are likewise high.

No need to exhaust every paper: depression, anxiety, and burnout often co-occur as workplace mental health disorders; in the general public, PTSD also often co-occurs with anxiety and depression.

That all four run high together among clinical staff and psychologists is not surprising.

When digging into the data, people easily carry an old expectation: even if doctors and psychologists get ill, incidence should be about one-tenth of ordinary people’s. Reality does not look like that.

Step back: even if they matched other occupations 1:1, calmly put, that would at least show existing medication tends to treat symptoms—like analgesia; put more heavily, existing drugs and psychotherapy have far from reached root causes.

Reality is worse—they often run above other occupations. Why? Mechanism is left to 01 Doctors in the same folder. This piece first plants the data.

VI. Occupational burnout: patients run into it directly

Patients also need to understand occupational burnout. Incidence is high, and it directly shapes the service and attitude every visitor meets. Burnout has mild, moderate, and severe grades.

What patients encounter at each severity can be filled in with AI search; here, only the severe grade is expanded.

At the severe grade, emotionally: severe depletion that weekend rest cannot restore; despair, persistent low mood, even self-harm thoughts; intense anger and dissatisfaction toward the medical system, patients, and colleagues; aversion to consultations and talk, wanting to escape work; depersonalization—showing up like a robot, cut off from the real self.

Physically: chronic fatigue, headache/migraine, whole-body pain, gastrointestinal problems (e.g. IBS), lowered immunity, palpitations and chest tightness, insomnia or hypersomnia.

These are also symptoms psychiatric patients often carry. Imagine the visit: as you describe your discomforts to the doctor, what you do not know is—the doctor may be thinking: I have these symptoms too, and mine are worse than yours.

This mismatch happens every day. Moderate–severe burnout often brings a crisis of professional identity. The inner monologue is often: “Why did I become a doctor? None of this means anything. I cannot help anyone at all.”

VII. Why the figures run low: concealment, not seeking help, self-prescribing

Why say survey data run low?

British scholar Gerada’s piece on doctor suicide and mental illness notes: ill doctors face intense stigma; some even pretend to go to work each day rather than admit illness to family. About 41% of doctors with mental illness said they would not disclose their condition.[10]

The same piece cites Australian data: about 24.8% of doctors had had suicidal thoughts before the past 12 months, 10.4% within the past 12 months—significantly higher than ordinary people and other occupations.[10]

Help-seeking rates among doctors with psychiatric disorders to others are only about 13%–36%, far below ordinary people—mainly from confidentiality, career risk, and license fears.[10][12]

A U.K. study of barriers to mental healthcare for psychiatrists: 86.2% unwilling to disclose outwardly; confidentiality 66%, stigma 22%, career impact 35%.

So how do they treat their own depression? 43.9% seek formal professional advice—note, formal advice is exactly what they give patients; 30.9% choose informal professional advice; 19.8% quietly self-medicate; about 4–5% seek no treatment.

When hospitalization is required, 46.2% choose a local private facility, only 4.1% the local NHS; 66.2% put confidentiality first in the decision, only 16.3% put best care quality first.[11]

These papers lay open “doctors’ secrets”: public prevalence figures will often run low.

And the effect of self-medication? A psychiatry-resident study: among 136 who reported needing pharmacotherapy, 41.2% self-medicated.

Self-medicated vs non-self-medicated groups showed almost no difference in depression, anxiety, and burnout shares—depression 83.9% vs 81.3%, anxiety 76.8% vs 85.0%, burnout 50.0% vs 48.8%.[16] Holding the power to prescribe is not the same as holding the root cause.

In the U.S., about 39.9% of doctors are unwilling to seek formal care for mental health for fear of license impact—useful as an institutional-side supplement.[26]

VIII. Nations have long known; special programs have not stopped the rise

Nations know these facts.

Reviews by Brooks and colleagues at King’s College London note: the U.S. has had Physician Health Programs (PHP) since the 1970s; Spain has PAIMM; London in the U.K. has the Practitioner Health Programme—all national-level channels dedicated to mental-health and addiction support for doctors (and dentists, etc.).[13][14][15]

Special programs show governments and professional bodies knew the risk early. What is the effect? Resident depression prevalence rising about 0.5 percentage points per year is one answer.

IX. Closing synthesis: nothing intercepted mild → suicide

Mental-illness incidence among doctors and psychologists is the most effective, most real validation of modern treatment methods.

At a visit, a psychiatrist may prescribe esketamine nasal spray, vortioxetine, escitalopram, duloxetine, venlafaxine, or suggest ECT or TMS; a psychologist may recommend CBT, IPT, ACT, DBT. The patient sees a string of opaque names and believes help has arrived.

Yet using these methods regarded as scientific, psychologists and psychiatrists still cannot stably rescue themselves and their colleagues; nor have they stopped healthcare workers’ depression and anxiety from mild to moderate, moderate to severe; still less from severe to suicide.

No step has been successfully intercepted. So what can these prevalence rates and suicide signals still say, scientifically?

The search also shows a curious reverse: among doctors, incidence of schizophrenia-spectrum, bipolar, and dissociative disorders often runs below ordinary people—the opposite of high depression. Why? See the mechanism piece 01 Doctors in the same folder.

This article’s conclusion is not “doctors are useless” or “do not seek care.” Emergency protection, medication stabilization, and crisis intervention still have real value.

What is being tested is the etiology layer: if the root cause were already mastered, those who know the system best should benefit first; reality runs the other way. Public data are only the entrance.