Aitana's depression and anxiety: why success doesn't shield you from mental illness

Aitana has depression and anxiety: what causes the distress of someone who has everything?

A young singer, beautiful, famous and with money. A diagnosis of anxiety and depression. And a question doing the rounds across half the internet: if the illness is suffered mainly by successful and fortunate people, what causes it? Aitana's case, aired in the gossip press, has peine a debate that mixes mental health, money, fame and an uncomfortable suspicion: perhaps success doesn't protect you from anything.

The discussion starts with a fact anyone can verify: people who have everything — beauty, youth, fame, money, desirable partners — also take medication. And it's not an exception. The question isn't whether Aitana is unwell, but why the story of triumph doesn't include the emotional bill it comes with.

What causes depression in someone who has everything?

One explanation keeps coming up: the pressure to maintain an image. Always being well, meeting commitments, dealing with people you don't feel like seeing, going where you don't feel like going, obsessing over your physique. Sustained success is a full-time job, and not always well paid in health.

Another line points to relational emptiness. Cold relationships, daily competitiveness, people who approach you out of self-interest. Someone famous attracts many, but most are only after one thing. Finding genuine affection in that environment is statistically improbable.

And a third, more uncomfortable line: depression doesn't distinguish between wallets. It can appear in those who have everything and those who have nothing. The difference is that the rich can pay for treatment, and the poor cannot.

Money doesn't buy peace of mind

Avicii's case is cited as an extreme example: fame and money are worth nothing if your head isn't healthy. Freedom, understood as being able to move around without being recognised, is presented as a more valuable asset than a bank account. Being rich but anonymous, the argument goes, is better than being rich and famous.

Fame imposes a servitude: not being able to go out without being stopped, not being able to eat what you want, not being able to make a mistake in public. And everything you have, in the case of an artist who builds her career on image, depends on a body and a face that time will erode.

Decline as a threat

One factor appears in several analyses: awareness of decline. Maintaining a body and a beauty that are your main asset generates a specific anxiety. You know that as time passes, millions of eyes will move elsewhere. And that, they say, weighs on you.

On top of that is the impossibility of creating something that doesn't depend on the physical. If your market value is your image, every wrinkle is a loss of capital.

The paradox of Aitana's backside

The most cited formulation of the debate: someone shut in their parents' basement with snacks and a screen is happier than an artist with a schedule, obligations and pressure. An abundance of stimuli doesn't make up for the lack of control over your own life.

The full calculation, with its nuances, leads to a surprising conclusion: freedom over your schedule and your body weighs more than wealth. Whoever can choose when and with whom, wins.

The social context: liquid relationships and constant comparison

The social diagnosis points to a deterioration of bonds. Superficial relationships, competitiveness, constant comparison. Fame amplifies all of that: more eyes, more judgment, less intimacy.

Diet and lifestyle are also mentioned as factors. Eating badly, sleeping badly, living at full estimulante ilegal. It's not the only cause, but it adds up.

---

In the end, the question remains without a clear answer. What the case makes clear is that success doesn't vaccinate you. And that whoever has money can get treatment; whoever doesn't, puts up with it. With these ingredients, the conversation about mental health and social class has only just begun.