Loneliness has become such a widespread problem that the UK began appointing a minister for loneliness in 2018. This news piqued the interest of a student named Julia Hotz, who was pursuing a doctorate in sociology at Cambridge.

Inspired by her own curiosity, Hotz designed a study that explored public opinion on what this new bureaucrat should do. Respondents consistently wanted better infrastructure to help them remedy their lonely lives.

“They said, ‘I wish the government would invest in third spaces and meeting places,’” Hotz recalls.

The idea was that helping lonely people – mainly older people – to come together with others with similar interests would ease pressure on overworked doctors in the National Health Service. Wait times had become notoriously long in a system bogged down by patients who needed attention as much as medical care. A pill can often cure but rarely prevent the ailments linked to loneliness.

Memories of these investigations resurfaced for Hotz when COVID-19 lockdowns in 2020 brought loneliness into the spotlight.

She was back in the United States, where she was pursuing a career at the Solutions Journalism Network, when she began writing about the steps communities were taking to address the health risks of forced isolation. That’s when she first discovered the term “social prescribing,” in which health workers instruct patients to take nature walks, visit art museums or volunteer in their communities to treat non-medical, socially determined illnesses, such as loneliness. Suddenly, a broader vision appeared.

“Oh, that’s what people who were lonely called it years ago,” she realized. “So why don’t we see what’s really behind all this? »

His journey of discovery took Hotz to several different countries over the next three years and is chronicled in his book “The Connection Cure.” Its comprehensive history traces the history of a movement with origins stretching back millennia to its modern revival in the UK and how it can address gaps in healthcare.

Desert Magazine: Who invented the term “social prescription”?

Julia Hotz: It’s unclear who exactly invented this concept, but the concept began in the mid-1980s in the United Kingdom, where doctors realized that a large number of patients they were seeing did not need medical support . At the same time, community organizations noticed that people who attended an art class or a cycling group were less depressed, anxious and lonely afterwards. All of these sectors came together to respond to a need that they all faced. Eventually, they convinced the government that social prescribing could ease pressure on the NHS and allow its doctors to better manage needs that required medical prescribing.

DM: How has this changed the approach of healthcare providers?

JH: The shift from ‘what’s wrong with you’ to ‘what matters to you’ was described by a founder of social prescribing in the UK, Dr Sam Everington. This resonates with people because no one likes to be defined by their symptoms. What I’ve heard from many patients is that when they focus only on the symptoms, providers begin to view them in that light and perhaps limit what a person can do. But when you take the time to learn about a person’s unique interests or talents, it’s a much more accurate way to perceive them. And it’s actually better for their recovery when patients themselves focus more on what matters to them.

DM: You divide these prescriptions into five categories. How did you identify them?

JH: As I researched what was happening in different countries, I realized that every social prescribing program had elements of these five elements: movement, nature, art, service, and belonging. And I think that’s true for several reasons. Number 1, most of our daily lives in the old, great, bad and wild times involved these things. We moved our bodies. We were attentive to nature. We created and consumed art, told stories. We evolved to survive in groups. That is why a lot of research does not study social prescriptions in particular, but the impact of nature or art on our health, which indicates universally positive results: it improves our mood, our attention, calms our nervous system, that sort of thing. .

DM: Did any of the five surprise you?

JH: Much of this is intuitive. I should move my body more. I should probably try to get out. But the extent to which it is helpful for symptoms like attention deficit, anxiety, depression, chronic pain, dementia, trauma, stress surprised and excited me. And what surprised me the most was the service and the story of a woman who suffered from chronic back pain. Through volunteering, her pain seemed less a part of her life. And it was so interesting. Research supports the idea that when we focus on other people or another cause, we literally feel better. Our body is catching up with our mind.

DM: Is there a tension between this new treatment and respect for its ancient roots?

JH: I struggle with this. On the one hand, it draws on millennia of science and theory. On the other hand, there is something compelling about giving a name to the independent findings from all these disciplines about how our environment affects our health. And wouldn’t it be great if it wasn’t left to just art therapists and some doctors? What if this were widespread, so that every provider who receives standard education and works for a healthcare facility could start offering social prescriptions in addition to medical prescriptions?

DM: Could this idea catch on in the United States, where there is no national health system like in the United Kingdom or Canada?

JH: It’s already happening here, from the Cleveland Clinic to Boston Medical Center to individual doctors, because it improves health outcomes. We are increasingly seeing private insurance companies such as Horizon Blue Cross Blue Shield support art prescription for the same reason that some are also starting to cover gym classes because of how it can reduce the cost of care health over time. And I think we see it because people say, “Do you have anything other than taking a pill” or maybe “this procedure isn’t right for me.” And I should also say here that the goal is not to replace these options. The goal is for it to be a complement to the menu of providers and patients.

DM: Who do you most want to read “Connection Cure”: the patient or the practitioner?

JH: If I had to choose, I would say it’s for the patient. There are some excellent practice books aimed at an implementer audience. I hope this book can reach the everyday person who knows someone suffering from loneliness, depression, anxiety, ADHD or dementia and is curious about what else might help them. Change happens when there is demand, when people mobilize around an idea. So I hope the ordinary reader can read this book and talk to their doctor about social prescribing.

DM: What is your last word?

JH: Even if people don’t feel sick, social prescribing can help us because what is behind movement, nature, art, service and belonging is to help us be more human.

This story appears in the November 2024 issue of Desert Magazine. Learn more about how to subscribe.