�Թ���

Current Considerations

Political polarization in the United States continues to deepen. After the longest government shutdown in U.S. history, which lasted 41 days, it remains fundamental to reflect on one’s well-being. Political events can evoke a variety of feelings, including stress. As research has indicated increasing polarization within recent years, there is potent importance in learning to navigate political discourse and maintain well-being (Chatterjee, Hasan, & Manfredonia, 2025).

Within the last year, the United States has undergone many changes. Obtaining a different presidential administration can be a substantial shift, and in January 2025, the U.S. entered this change following the 2024 presidential election. As with any ideological shift in political representation, constituents across the states express their thoughts and emotions, which can range from positive to negative. These differences in reactions, beliefs, and values can evoke hostility, which leads to heightened polarization (Chatterjee, Hasan, & Manfredonia, 2025). Polarization refers to the internally perceived distance between an individual and individuals who hold opposing opinions or identify with a different political party (Bar-On et al. 2024).

Current events, both nationally and globally, may contribute to increases in both stress and polarization. As an example, the recent U.S. government shutdown was a significant political event that brought stress across the nation. During this time, many federal employees were laid off, including staff for the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (Brumfiel and Chatterjee, 2025; O’Brien, 2025). Concerns over activity with federal departments, international relations, judicial precedents, government funding and programs, and more may be common political stressors. Smith (2022) classified politics as a chronic source of stress. Stress is known to produce adverse effects on health at both the psychological and physical levels (Abrams & Ford, 2024). Scholarly research and reputable media sources have provided paramount considerations for the intricate intersection of mental health and political polarization. Much recent insight on this topic is illustrated in the Stress in America™ 2024 study by the American Psychological Association.

Political matters make complex stressors, as the term “politics” encompasses a vast array of topics. Dr. Brett Ford, an associate professor at the �Թ��� of Toronto, described how the complicated nature of politics can cause a range of emotions, including sadness, frustration, worry, and anger (Abrams & Ford, 2024). Such emotions may prompt stress, which can be disruptive to daily tasks and routines. Research has suggested political anxiety is separate from generalized anxiety, even though the two can overlap (Abrams & Ford, 2024; Weinschenk & Smith, 2024). Therefore, anyone, regardless of mental health conditions, may experience political anxiety.

Polarization

Research has identified that polarization can occur within various categories, including political, social, cultural, geographic, affective, and economic (Bar-On et al., 2024). Affective polarization is aversion and distrust of others with differing opinions (Bar-On et al. 2024). It may deter social connection (Fraser et al., 2022). Moreover, scholars propose that polarization can occur at an individual or group level. Collective polarization considers the affective distance between groups or communities resulting from hostility due to ideological differences; individual polarization is the same, but between an individual and groups (Bar-On et al., 2024).

Groups may not only differ based on ideology, but also on primary stressors. Sources of stress may differ for each political party, though main areas of concern include the economy, violence and crime, health care, the environment, global conflict, and gun laws (Stress in America™ 2024, APA). Other research has shown that some adults blame political stress for causing losses of sleep or temper, and around 25% reported considering moving because of politics (Smith, 2022). Polarization may also have broader implications on policymaking and governance, in addition to raising public health concerns (Fraser et al., 2022). However, Hatton et al. (2023) found bipartisan support for addressing social health determinants with federal policy. Therefore, there might be more overlap across the parties on certain issues than is often perceived.

Political Engagement and Elections

Keeping up to date with local and global current events can also be an anxiety-inducing task. In a survey from the American Psychological Association, 72% of U.S. adults stated that they believe that checks and balances are not working (Stress in America™ 2024, APA). Generally, top political concerns reported include the nation’s future, the economy, and the presidential election (Stress in America™ 2024, APA).

There are psychological strategies to reframe emotions surrounding political engagement, although one study found participants who reframed or distracted themselves from politics were also less likely to be politically engaged (Abrams and Ford, 2024). However, Dr. Ford noted that both negative and positive emotions toward politics can motivate action (Abrams and Ford, 2024).

Notably, research has indicated links between mental health and politics surrounding elections. As a political event, an election can induce stress. According to the American Psychological Association, 69% of adults in the United States reported the 2024 presidential election to be a significant stressor, with 72% being concerned that the results could prompt violent action (Stress in America™ 2024, APA). The most common election stressors indicated by survey responses included election impacts on constituent lives and democracy, potential violence, candidate quality, and political party division (Stress in America™ 2024, APA).

A principal concern with elections is the potential to gain or lose representation (Chatterjee, Hasan, and Manfredonia, 2025). Another survey by Forbes Health found that political tension negatively impacted social relationships, with 44% of respondents reporting anxiety toward holiday season social interactions (Prendergast, 2024). In a different study, participants reported worse physical health while experiencing increased election anxiety (Abrams and Ford, 2024).

Interestingly, some studies found that anxious and depressive symptoms fade in the weeks following an election (Abrams and Ford, 2024). Psychologists have described that feeling stressed in the time surrounding elections is typical, and that it is important to acknowledge related feelings (Chatterjee, 2024). Heightened anxiety leading up to a major event is a valid, common occurrence.

Positive Indications

Importantly, there are positive findings from research on mental health and political polarization. According to the Stress in America™ 2024 study by the American Psychological Association, 62% of adults reported that they believe that their votes hold meaning. Future civic engagement may increase, as there was a 6% increase in respondents saying they volunteered or supported causes that are important to them from 2020 to 2024 (Stress in America™ 2024, APA). Additionally, the Forbes Health survey found that when it comes to discussing politics, 42% of respondents reported being able to share opinions with friends, 31% with partners, and 23% with parents (Prendergast, 2024). As communication is fundamental, the ability to comfortably engage in political discourse with others, even when there might be disagreement, may provide an opportunity for intellectual growth and connection.

Moving Forward

What can be done concerning the intersection of mental health and political polarization? There are a variety of avenues through which action can be taken by any political actor to both bridge divisive polarization and expand mental health awareness. On structural and institutional levels, Foley (2024) thoroughly discusses a list of suggestions for decreasing U.S. political polarization. Socially and personally, Chatterjee (2024) suggested stress management through staying connected, acknowledging uncertainty, limiting media consumption, and practicing meaningful, healthy activities.

Furthermore, finding methods to engage in respectful discourse and acknowledge disagreements as opportunities to learn can expand perspectives. Organizations like the National Public Radio (NPR) provide insight into navigating political events. When it comes to discussing differences in opinion, Aubrey (2024) describes that listening, acknowledging others’ thoughts, and then asking to share your perspective is an effective approach offered by Braver Angels. Speaking up and advocating for one’s beliefs is one method to disseminate awareness and information on political matters. Building and practicing empathy is key (Aubrey, 2024).

At any point in time, but particularly while polarization is heightened, it remains imperative to prioritize well-being. Health organizations and popular news outlets, including the National Alliance on Mental Illness and BetterHelp, have published many support resources and recommendations for self-care (Brant, 2025; Shutdown Resources, 2025). Colleges and universities may also be critical sources that offer these suggestions. For instance, Syracuse professor Afton Kapuscinski noted that political divides provide opportunities to think critically, internally reflect, and expand empathy (Lovell, 2025).

Inevitably, the sharp divisiveness of political polarization brings a myriad of considerable consequences for both psychological and physical health. Implications from various studies implore the importance of well-being during times of divided politics (Fraser et al., 2022; Nayak et al., 2021; Prendergast, 2024; Smith, 2022). Empathy is an underutilized social power. By taking a step back to acknowledge and consider diverse perspectives, positive interactions may be socially cultivated. In times of divide, discovering ways to care for oneself and connect with others is of utmost importance.

��

References

Abrams, Z., & Ford, B. (2024). The Impact of Election Stress: Is Political Anxiety Harming Your Health? American Psychological Association.
��

American Psychological Association. (2024). Stress in America™ 2024: A Nation in Political Turmoil.
��

Aubrey, A. (2024). How to talk politics when you disagree and reduce election stress: Shots - Health News. NPR.
��

Bar-On, K. K., Dimant, E., Lelkes, Y., & Rand, D. G. (2024). Unraveling Polarization: Insights into Individual and Collective Dynamics. PNAS Nexus, 3(10), 426.
��

Brant, A. (2025). Political Anxiety and Mental Health: Coping with Stress in a Divided World. BetterHelp.
��

Brietzke, E. (2023). Understanding and Navigating the Repercussions of the Politically Polarized Climate in Mental Health. Trends in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, 45.
��

Brumfiel, G., & Chatterjee, R. (2025). Trump Cuts Jobs at Nation's Mental Health Agency and Some Jobs at CDC : Shots - Health News. NPR.
��

Chatterjee, R. (2024). How to Manage Election Anxiety: Shots - Health News. NPR.
��

Chatterjee, S., Hasan, I., & Manfredonia, S. (2025). The Health Costs of Losing Political Representation: Evidence from U.S. Presidential Elections. PLoS ONE, 20(10), e0334507.
��

Foley, E. B. (2024). Decreasing the Political Polarization of the American Public. American Bar Association.
��

Fraser, T., Aldrich, D. P., Panagopoulos, C., Hummel, D., & Kim, D. (2022). The Harmful Effects of Partisan Polarization on Health. PNAS Nexus, 1(1).
��

Hatton, C. R., Ettman, C. K., Gollust, S., Abdalla, S. M., & Galea, S. (2024). Mental Health and U.S. Attitudes Toward Social Determinants of Health Policies. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 67(3), 350–359.
��

Lovell, D. (2025). Protecting Your Health in a Polarized World: Expert Advice on Political Stress | Syracuse �Թ��� Today. Syracuse �Թ��� News.
��

Nayak, S. S., Fraser, T., Panagopoulos, C., Aldrich, D. P., & Kim, D. (2021). Is Divisive Politics Making Americans Sick? Associations of Perceived Partisan Polarization with Physical and Mental Health Outcomes Among Adults in the United States. Social Science & Medicine (1982), 284, 113976.
��

Oberlander, J. (2024). Polarization, Partisanship, and Health in the United States. Journal of Health Politics, Policy, and Law 1, 49(3): 329–350.
��

O'Brien, J. (2025). Mental Health, Substance Abuse Staffers Fired Amid Government Shutdown: Sources. ABC News.
��

Panagopoulos, C., & Weinschenk, A. C. (2023). Health and Election Outcomes: Evidence from the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election. Political Research Quarterly, 76(2), 712–724.
��

Prendergast, C. (2024). Election Anxiety: 61% Say Presidential Election's Impact on Mental Health is Negative. Forbes Health.
��

Smith, K. B. (2022). Politics is Making Us Sick: The Negative Impact of Political Engagement on Public Health During the Trump Administration. PloS one, 17(1), e0262022.
��

Shutdown Resources. (2025). National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI).
��

Tomlinson, I. (2025). The Government Shutdown May Be Ending, but Its Effects on the Nation's Health Will Linger. U.S. News & World Report.
��

Weinschenk, A., & Smith, K. (2024). Is Political Anxiety Different Than General Anxiety? Politics and the Life Sciences, 43(2), 226-234. doi:10.1017/pls.2024.6

Yousafzai, A. W. (2022). Political Polarization and Its Impact on Mental Health: Where Do We Stand? Khyber Medical �Թ��� Journal, 14(1), 1–2.
��