Trauma: Emotional and Psychological Wounds

Across Australian Demographics in Today’s Climate: A Review of Current Statistics and Research | webbtherapy.org | 2025–2026

Introduction

Australia is navigating one of the most psychologically challenging periods in its modern history. Converging social, economic, and political forces — including a cost-of-living crisis, housing unaffordability, the lingering aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, and growing climate anxiety — are placing significant strain on the mental health of people across all age groups and demographics.

According to the National Mental Health Commission’s National Report Card 2024, approximately 3.8 million Australians aged 16 and over — nearly one in five — experienced a mental disorder in the past year, with anxiety and depression the most prevalent conditions (NMHC, 2025). This document draws on the most current Australian research and data to provide a demographic overview of the psychological and emotional issues affecting Australians today.

1. Children & Adolescents (Ages 12–17)

Young Australians are experiencing rising rates of psychological distress at a level that represents a genuine public health emergency. Multiple intersecting pressures — financial insecurity in the home, climate anxiety, social media use, and disruptions to schooling and socialisation — are placing extraordinary demands on developing minds.

Key Statistics

Psychological distress: A 2025 headspace survey of over 3,000 young Australians found that nearly half (49%) were experiencing high or very high levels of psychological distress. Among 12–14 year-olds, the rate was 31%, rising to 65% among 18–25 year-olds (headspace, 2025).

Financial stress: The Mission Australia Youth Survey 2025 found that 64% of young people aged 14–19 identified cost of living as Australia’s most pressing national issue — the highest level since the question was first asked in 2010, and up from 56% in 2024 and 31% in 2023 (Mission Australia, 2025).

Mental health concerns: Two in five young people (39%) reported stress related to their own mental health and wellbeing, and nearly one in five (19%) reported experiencing high psychological distress in the weeks prior to being surveyed (Mission Australia, 2025).

Gender differences: The ABS National Study of Mental Health and Wellbeing (2020–22) found that 34.2% of females aged 16–24 reported high or very high psychological distress, compared with 18% of males in the same age group (ABS, 2023).

At-risk subgroups: Distress rates are especially elevated among LGBTIQA+ young people (77%) and First Nations young people (59%) (headspace, 2025).

Contributing Factors

The National Mental Health Commission (2025) identifies multiple drivers of deteriorating youth mental health, including increased financial insecurity, concerns about climate change, shifting social connection patterns — particularly the move to digital interaction over in-person connection — changes in sleep, screen time, and nutrition, and the disproportionate socioeconomic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on young people’s lives.

2. Young Adults (Ages 18–35)

Young adults are among the most psychologically vulnerable groups in Australia at present. They face a unique confluence of pressures: the transition to independent adulthood, entry into an unaffordable housing market, tertiary education debt, precarious employment, and an uncertain political and economic landscape.

Key Statistics

Prevalence: Young adults aged 18–34 report the highest rates of mental health symptoms of any adult age group, with approximately 45% experiencing symptoms in 2025, up from 40% in 2023 (NMHC/AIHW, 2025).

Cost-of-living and mental health: A 2025 Compare the Market survey found that 72% of Gen Z respondents said cost-of-living pressures had worsened or triggered anxiety and depression, impacting their health, sleep and relationships — the highest rate of any age cohort (SBS Insight, 2025).

Housing stress: Australia’s Rental Affordability Index labels all major cities and regional areas as ‘critically unaffordable’ for people on lower incomes. A 2025 longitudinal study tracking more than 10,000 Australian renters found mental health declines sharply once housing costs exceed 30% of income (The Conversation, 2025).

Loneliness: Recent data suggests that 1 in 4 Australian men aged 15–34 report feeling lonely most days (Psychology NSW, 2025).

Emerging Concerns

Social comparison via social media, economic precarity*, and the perceived impossibility of home-ownership are contributing to a pervasive sense of hopelessness and deferred life milestones. Many young adults report anxiety about the future as a core psychological preoccupation.

*Precarity definition: the condition of existence without predictability or security, characterised by instability in employment, income, and social safety nets.

3. Men (All Ages)

Men represent a persistently underserved demographic in mental health. Cultural norms around masculinity continue to suppress help-seeking, while suicide rates among men remain disproportionately high across all age groups. In 2024, men accounted for 76.5% of all suicide deaths in Australia — a ratio that has remained largely unchanged for decades (ABS, 2025; AMHF, 2025).

Key Statistics

Suicide: 3,307 Australians died by suicide in 2024, of whom 2,529 (76.5%) were male. The age-standardised suicide rate for men was 18.7 per 100,000, compared with 5.5 per 100,000 for women. Men aged 40–44 accounted for the largest proportion of male suicide deaths (10.5%) (ABS, 2025; Life in Mind, 2025).

Working-age men: The number of suicides in men of working age (25–64) reached a record high in 2024 (AMHF, 2025), with males aged 60–64 experiencing an 18% increase in age-specific suicide rates from 2023 to 2024 (ABS, 2025).

Help-seeking gap: While men are 3.5 times more likely to die by suicide than women, they make up less than 40% of people seeking mental health support. Research indicates that 1 in 8 Australian men experience depression or anxiety, but fewer than half receive treatment (Psychology NSW, 2025).

High-risk occupations: Suicide rates among male construction workers are approximately double those of other male workers, with an age-standardised rate of 26.6 per 100,000 compared to 13.2 for other male workers (Lancet Regional Health, 2024).

Somatic presentation: Men are more likely to present with physical symptoms of depression and anxiety — chronic headaches, fatigue, back pain — rather than emotional ones, often delaying diagnosis and intervention (Psychology NSW, 2025).

4. Women (All Ages)

Women consistently report higher rates of psychological distress, anxiety, and depression than men. Additional psychological burdens arise from gendered experiences including domestic labour, caregiving, family violence, reproductive health, and workplace inequity.

Key Statistics

Distress rates: In the 2022 National Health Survey, women aged 18 and over were more likely to report high or very high psychological distress than men. Among young women aged 18–25, the rate was 34.2% — the highest of any adult demographic (ABS, 2023; Dharmayani & Mihrshahi, 2025).

Financial stress: 56.6% of millennial women surveyed in 2025 reported that cost-of-living pressures had worsened or triggered anxiety and depression (SBS Insight, 2025). Single mothers and women in casual employment are particularly vulnerable to financial-related mental health impacts.

Suicide: Women aged 25–29 had the highest age-specific female suicide rate (9.8 per 100,000) and accounted for the largest proportion of female suicide deaths (12.3%) in 2024 (Life in Mind, 2025).

Income and distress: Research from Dharmayani and Mihrshahi (2025), using Australian National Health Survey data, found that psychological distress increased as personal weekly income decreased, confirming income insecurity as a significant driver of poor mental health among women.

5. Older Adults (Ages 65+)

Older Australians face a distinct set of psychological challenges shaped by major life transitions — retirement, bereavement, declining health, loss of independence, and changing living arrangements. These experiences, when compounded by social isolation, can have profound effects on mental health.

Key Statistics

Loneliness and social isolation: According to the AIHW (2024), approximately 16% of Australians aged over 65 experience loneliness, and 11% are socially isolated. Research suggests loneliness may increase the risk of premature death to a degree comparable to smoking or obesity (Ausmed, 2026).

Depression in aged care: Approximately 52% of older adults in residential aged care experience depressive symptoms, while 8.2% of community-dwelling older adults experience depression (ScienceDirect, 2021).

Men aged 85+: Older men are at particularly elevated suicide risk. In 2024, males aged over 85 had the highest age-specific suicide rate of any group at 31.2 per 100,000 (Life in Mind, 2025).

Digital exclusion: Australians aged 65 and over remain the least digitally included age group, with an Australian Digital Inclusion Index score of 49.7 compared to the national average of 63.0 (NMHC, 2022). This digital exclusion compounds social isolation, particularly post-pandemic.

Contributing Factors

As identified by Engel and Mihalopoulos (2024) in the Medical Journal of Australia, the ‘loneliness epidemic’ represents a major public health concern in older age. Life transitions including retiring from work, loss of friends and partners, declining physical health, and the move to residential aged care all increase vulnerability to loneliness, depression, and anxiety.

6. Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander Peoples

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples experience significantly higher rates of psychological distress and suicide compared to non-Indigenous Australians. These outcomes must be understood within a broader cultural, historical, and social context that includes the ongoing impacts of colonisation, systemic racism, intergenerational trauma, and ongoing barriers to accessing culturally safe services. Mental health in this context is better understood through the framework of social and emotional wellbeing (SEWB), which encompasses connection to Country, family, kinship, community, and culture.

Key Statistics

Psychological distress: In 2022–23, approximately 30% of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults experienced high or very high levels of psychological distress in the four weeks prior to interview (ABS, 2024; NMHC, 2025). This is more than double the general population rate of 14% (ABS, 2022).

The role of discrimination: Analysis of the Mayi Kuwayu study (2018–2021) found that 42% of First Nations people experienced high or very high psychological distress; among those experiencing everyday racial discrimination, the rate was 49%, compared with 32% for those who did not report such discrimination (ABS, 2024).

Suicide: In 2024, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people had an age-standardised suicide rate of 33.9 per 100,000 — more than triple the non-Indigenous rate. This rate was 6.5% higher than in 2023. For Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander men, the rate was 55.1 per 100,000 (Life in Mind, 2025).

Anxiety: Anxiety was the most common mental or behavioural condition reported in the 2022–23 National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Survey, affecting 21% of respondents aged two and over; it was 1.5 times more common among females (25%) than males (17%) (ABS, 2024).

Access to services: Around one in four First Nations people aged 15 and over (26%) would have liked to access mental health support but did not in the 12 months prior to survey, with access barriers particularly pronounced in remote areas (ABS, 2024).

7. LGBTIQA+ People

LGBTIQA+ Australians continue to experience disproportionately poor mental health outcomes compared to their heterosexual and cisgender peers. These outcomes are directly linked to experiences of stigma, prejudice, discrimination, and social exclusion — often described through the lens of minority stress theory. Progress in legal rights does not automatically translate to psychological safety or equitable mental healthcare.

Key Statistics

Mental disorders: People with a diverse sexual identity are three times more likely to be diagnosed with a mental disorder compared to heterosexual people (ABS, 2023).

Self-harm: Trans and gender-diverse Australians are twice as likely to engage in self-harm throughout their lifetime compared to cisgender Australians (ABS, 2023).

Psychological distress in youth: Among young people, LGBTIQA+ respondents reported a distress rate of 77% — significantly above the general youth population rate of 49% — in the Headspace 2025 survey.

Suicidality: Members of the LGBTQIA+ community report suicide attempts at rates up to 10 times higher than the general population (Lifeline, 2025).

Healthcare barriers: In the Private Lives 3 national survey, 57% of LGBTIQ respondents reported being treated unfairly in the past 12 months based on their sexual orientation, and 77.5% of trans and gender-diverse respondents reported being treated unfairly based on their gender identity. Only 43.4% of LGBTIQ respondents felt accepted when accessing health services (AMA, 2024).

Rural/regional compounding: Research published in 2025 found LGBTQ+ people in rural and regional communities experienced compounded psychological harm due to conservative social environments, limited peer connection, and inadequate access to inclusive services (Tandfonline, 2025).

8. Financial Stress as a Cross-Cutting Issue

Economic pressures represent one of the most significant cross-cutting determinants of psychological distress across all Australian demographics. The confluence of rising housing costs, elevated mortgage rates, rental stress, and a persistent cost-of-living gap is affecting people’s mental health in tangible and measurable ways.

Key Statistics

Financial stress prevalence: Close to 7 in 10 Australian households (69%) are dealing with significant financial stress, with 57% struggling to afford household essentials including groceries, utilities, and healthcare (Real Insurance, 2024).

Mental health impact: A 2025 Compare the Market survey found that nearly half of Australians (48.7%) said cost-of-living pressures had worsened or triggered anxiety and depression, affecting their health, sleep, and relationships (SBS Insight, 2025).

Housing stress: In 2024–25, an estimated 1.26 million low-income households were in financial housing stress, spending more than 30% of their disposable income on housing (AIHW, 2025). Almost half (44.5%) of households with a mortgage spent above this threshold (AIHW, 2025).

Skipping healthcare: Almost two-thirds of financially stressed Australians (65%) have skipped essential medical appointments — including mental health appointments — due to cost (Real Insurance, 2024).

Beyond Blue’s Clinical Spokesperson Dr Luke Martin has noted the bidirectional relationship between financial stress and mental health: financial hardship affects mood, cognition, sleep, and relationships, while poor mental health in turn impairs a person’s capacity to manage money and seek help — creating a cycle that is often difficult to escape without external support (HIA, 2026).

9. Summary of Key Themes by Demographic

• Children & Adolescents (12–17): Rising psychological distress (49% high/very high); financial stress at home; social media pressures; climate anxiety; loneliness; academic disruption. Elevated risk for LGBTIQA+ youth (77%) and First Nations youth (59%).
• Young Adults (18–35): Cost-of-living and housing affordability crisis driving anxiety and depression; loneliness; identity and purpose challenges; deferred life milestones; highest mental disorder rates of any adult cohort.
• Men (All Ages): Persistent help-seeking barriers; disproportionately high suicide rates (76.5% of deaths); somatic symptom presentation; high-risk occupations (construction); financial and work-related stress.
• Women (All Ages): Higher distress and anxiety rates; financial vulnerability; caregiving burden; family violence; cost-of-living impacts; elevated suicide risk in young women aged 25–29.
• Older Adults (65+): Loneliness and social isolation; depression; bereavement; loss of independence; digital exclusion; very high suicide risk in men aged 85+.
• Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander Peoples: Intergenerational trauma; systemic racism; high distress and suicide rates (33.9 per 100,000); cultural disconnection; access barriers to culturally safe care.
• LGBTIQA+ People: Minority stress; discrimination in healthcare; three-fold increase in mental disorder diagnoses; elevated self-harm and suicidality; rural/regional compounding factors.

Disclaimer

This document has been prepared for informational and professional development purposes. All statistics and research references were current as at April 2026. Data from some primary sources have been collected in prior years; readers are encouraged to consult primary sources for the most current figures. This document does not constitute clinical advice.

If you’ve ever found yourself thinking “Part of me wants to change… but part of me’s not sure”, you’re not alone. That back-and-forth, weighing things up—“Should I? Shouldn’t I?”—is a normal part of how people process big (and small) decisions. In counselling, this is called ambivalence, and rather than seeing it as a barrier, Motivational Interviewing (MI) treats it as a starting point for meaningful conversations.

What Is Motivational Interviewing?

Motivational Interviewing is a counselling approach that helps people explore their own reasons for change, without pressure or judgment. It’s a respectful, supportive way of helping you work through the push-pull that often comes with making decisions. You’re in the driver’s seat—we’re just here to help you navigate.

You might hear MI described in different ways:

In simple terms:
“MI is a collaborative conversation style that helps strengthen your own motivation and commitment to change.”

In practice:
“MI is about helping you make sense of mixed feelings and explore what’s right for you—based on your values, your goals, and your life.”

MI isn’t about telling you what to do. It’s about listening deeply, asking thoughtful questions, and helping you make sense of where you’re at—and where you might want to go.

Why It’s Not Just a Quick Fix

While MI can be used in short sessions, the research shows it works best when there’s time to really explore your thinking. In studies where people had just one 15-minute session, the outcomes were decent. But when they had more time—say, several sessions of an hour—the results were much stronger. That’s probably because real change often takes time, reflection, and a bit of back-and-forth.

MI originally started in the health world—helping people reduce alcohol use, manage weight, or improve their health. More recently, it’s been used to address things like vaccine hesitancy. But MI isn’t just for health issues. It can also help with things like relationship struggles, career decisions, or anything where you might feel stuck or unsure.

Ambivalence Is Normal

Let’s say you’re thinking about quitting smoking, leaving a relationship, or starting something new. You might feel torn—part of you is ready, and another part isn’t. That’s ambivalence.

MI offers tools to help with this, including something called the Decisional Balance, which simply helps you look at both sides: What are the good things about staying the same? What are the reasons you might want to change?

But here’s the thing—MI isn’t about pushing you toward a particular outcome. If you’re trying to make a decision where there’s no obvious “right” answer—like whether to stay in a relationship—the counsellor stays neutral. They don’t steer you in one direction. Instead, they help you explore what matters to you.

Talking Your Way Toward Change

One of the interesting things about MI is how it pays attention to the language you use when you talk about change.

Some of the things people say when they’re starting to think about change include:

• “I probably should cut down…”
• “I’d like to feel better about this…”
• “I don’t know if I can keep doing this…”

These kinds of statements are called change talk—and they’re actually signs that something inside you is shifting. MI aims to gently encourage and grow this kind of talk, because research shows that the more someone talks about change, the more likely they are to act on it.

There’s also sustain talk, which sounds like:

• “I don’t smoke that much…”
• “I know I should, but it helps me relax.”
• “Now’s not really the right time.”

Both are normal. In MI, there’s no need to rush. Instead, the focus is on listening to both sides of you—and helping you get clearer about what you want to do next.

Getting Skilled Support

Like any professional approach, MI works best when the counsellor is trained and skilled in using it. Some practitioners have their sessions reviewed (with consent) by independent experts to make sure the spirit and skills of MI are being used well.

If you ever hear a practitioner say they “do MI”, you can ask what that looks like. The most effective use of MI goes beyond just asking open-ended questions or offering summaries—it’s about how your counsellor supports you in finding your own reasons for change.

What a Session Might Involve

Motivational Interviewing tends to follow a flexible process with four key parts:

1. Engaging – Building trust and understanding
2. Focusing – Exploring what matters most to you
3. Evoking – Drawing out your own reasons for change
4. Planning – When you’re ready, looking at possible next steps

You don’t have to go through these in a straight line. Some days you might focus on one step, then circle back to another later. It’s all guided by you—your pace, your readiness, your goals.

In Summary

If you’re feeling uncertain about making a change—or you’ve been thinking about it for a while but haven’t quite landed on what to do—Motivational Interviewing could be a really helpful way to explore things.

It’s not about being told what to do, and it’s not about “fixing” you. It’s a respectful, evidence-based approach that helps people work through their own ambivalence, connect with what matters to them, and move toward change when they’re ready.

Change doesn’t have to be instant. And it doesn’t have to be perfect. But it can start with a conversation.

“I’m just lazy.” It’s one of the most common things we say about ourselves, and it’s almost always inaccurate — or at least, it’s not the full story. “Lazy” is a character judgement. It implies a fixed trait, a moral failing, something the person simply is. In reality, what looks like so-called “laziness” from the outside is usually a specific, nameable process happening underneath: low energy, fear, overwhelm, disconnection from meaning, or a nervous system that’s stuck.

Swapping “lazy” for “unmotivated” is a good first step, but it can still flatten quite different experiences into one vague label. Below are some more precise alternatives, what they actually describe, and examples of how they show up in real life.

When the problem is getting started

Low activation
This describes difficulty initiating action even when the desire is genuinely there. The want exists; the ignition doesn’t turn over.

Example: Someone wants to reply to a mate’s text, has wanted to all day, keeps thinking about it — and still hasn’t opened the message by evening. It’s not that they don’t care.

Avolition
A more clinical term for a reduced capacity to initiate and follow through on goal-directed behaviour. It’s heavier and more diagnostic, yet accurate. It is commonly linked to major depression, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia.

Example: A person who used to cook every night now can’t manage to put a frozen meal in the microwave, despite being hungry and having no external barrier.

Task paralysis / overwhelm-driven inaction
The task itself feels too big, too undefined, or too loaded, so the person freezes rather than starts.

Example: A person needs to “sort out their finances.” There’s no single first step, so nothing happens — not because they don’t want order, but because the whole thing feels like an unclimbable wall.

When the problem is energy or capacity

Low energy / depleted
Sometimes it’s simpler than motivation — the person is running on empty. This is especially relevant with burnout, chronic illness, or the tail end of a stressful period.

Example: A person who was previously proactive at work is now struggling to answer emails, not because the job has changed, but because they’ve been running on adrenaline for six months and have nothing left.

When the problem is avoidance

Avoidant coping
Here, the “laziness” is really a strategy — often an unconscious one — to dodge a task that triggers anxiety, shame, or fear of failure. The inaction is protective, not apathetic.

Example: A person keeps “forgetting” to start an assignment they actually care about, because starting means risking it not being good enough.

Procrastination
Useful when the issue is delay rather than total refusal — the person will eventually do the thing, but keeps pushing it to the edge. Procrastination gets treated like a single thing, but it’s usually a surface behaviour with several different engines underneath it. Here’s what tends to actually be driving it:

1. Fear of failure (or fear of judgement): if the work is never finished, it can never be judged as not good enough. Delay protects self-esteem.
2. Fear of success: less talked about, but real — finishing well can raise expectations, invite more responsibility, or change a relationship dynamic the person isn’t ready for.
3. Perfectionism: not “I might fail” so much as “it has to be right, and I don’t yet know how to make it right.” The standard is so high that starting feels premature. Perfectionism is frequently a strategy for managing fear of judgement (and fear of failure), not a standalone driver in its own right. The logic is If I can make this flawless, no one can criticise it → if no one can criticise it, I’m safe from judgement → therefore I must make it flawless before I let it be seen. “It has to be right” isn’t really about the work — it’s a control mechanism aimed at the anticipated judgement. The satisfaction or reward is real too, but it’s often secondary. It’s a learned reward layered on top: the relief of having pre-empted criticism gets experienced as “getting it right” rather than “avoiding exposure.”
4. Emotion regulation, not time management: this is the reframe from the procrastination research (Tim Pychyl, Fuschia Sirois) that’s shifted a lot of clinical thinking: procrastination isn’t primarily a planning failure, it’s an attempt to avoid a negative feeling attached to the task right now, at the cost of a bigger problem later. The person is regulating today’s mood at the expense of tomorrow’s outcome.
5. Task aversiveness: sometimes it’s simpler — the task itself is boring, tedious, ambiguous, or otherwise unpleasant, and there’s no emotional complexity beyond “I don’t want to.”
6. Temporal discounting: a cognitive-behavioural angle. Humans are wired to weight immediate rewards over future ones, even when the future cost is much larger. The person isn’t choosing badly on purpose; the brain is built to prefer now.
7. Autonomy/control conflict: sometimes procrastination is a quiet act of resistance — doing the task on someone else’s timeline feels like a loss of control, so delay becomes the only lever the person has left.
8. Low self-efficacy: the person doubts their ability to do the task well or at all, so starting feels pointless or exposing.

Example: A person always finishes reports the night before they’re due, every time, despite genuine intentions to start earlier.

When the problem is follow-through, not starting

Low follow-through / inconsistent follow-through
The person starts fine but struggles to sustain the behaviour over time. This is more behavioural and less about character, which tends to land better if you are already hard on yourself.

Example: Someone joins a gym, goes three times enthusiastically, then stops — not from laziness, but because the initial motivation (novelty, resolution energy) wasn’t backed by a system to sustain it.

Difficulty sustaining effort
Similar to the above, but useful when the task requires ongoing, low-grade output rather than one big push.

Example: A person can write a brilliant first page of a project but can’t sustain the plodding, unglamorous middle section.

When the problem is meaning or direction

Disengaged
This applies when the task doesn’t feel connected to anything the person actually values or wants. It’s not an energy or fear problem — it’s a “why would I” problem.

Example: A person who says they’re “too lazy” to network for a job they don’t actually want, in an industry someone else has pushed them into.

Ambivalent
Borrowed from motivational interviewing, this names a genuine internal split — part of the person wants to do the thing, and part doesn’t, and both parts are real and legitimate. It’s a particularly useful reframe because it doesn’t pathologise the resistance; it treats it as information.

Example: A person wants to leave a relationship and doesn’t want to leave it, in roughly equal measure — and the “laziness” they report about making a decision is really that unresolved tension.

Why the re-labelling matters

The value of a more precise term isn’t just semantic tidiness — it changes the intervention. “Unmotivated” invites a pep talk. “Avoidant coping” invites a conversation about what the task threatens. “Low activation” invites behavioural scaffolding (breaking things into smaller steps) rather than willpower-based advice. “Ambivalent” invites exploring both sides rather than pushing harder on one.

Rather than substituting one label for another, it can help to ask what’s underneath the “laziness” for them specifically. Low energy, fear of failure, unclear goals, overwhelm, and disconnection from meaning can look identical from the outside — someone just not doing the thing — but they call for very different responses. Naming the actual mechanism tends to land better than any single re-labelling word ever could.