Do you really think we should medicalise depression when depression is actually an emotional problem caused by your shit life and your reaction to it?

>BUT GENETICS
Genetics are thought to contribute only 37% of your risk of major depressive disorder (aka clinical depression). Source for that is here: https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.ajp.157.10.1552

Furthermore, when people are diagnosed with depression, genetic tests are not carried out. And even if they were, we don't really know what genes are associated with depression yet, nor how they might cause someone to be depressed. Perhaps some of these genes are associated with OTHER physical health conditions which cause problems in a person's life, and therefore indirectly contribute to an increased risk of depression (since depression is an emotional reaction to your life conditions).

Isn't it much more helpful to depressed people that we try and help them overcome the problems in their lives - e.g. unfulfilling job, lack of social life, lack of friends, no exercise, poor diet, etc. - instead of literally drugging them so that they ignore their ACCURATE biological instincts telling them that their life is unfulfilling?

But I guess the deep dark truth is that society doesn't want to help depressed people, because why would you help someone else in the rat race of life? We're all competing for money, status, etc., so people don't want to help others.

And that's perfectly understandable, life is a competition, so fair enough that people want to help themselves first. But I just think it's ethically dubious to perpetuate the dishonest notion that drugging people with antidepressants is trying to help them. Is it really for the patient's benefit, or is it for society's benefit? "Forget about your issues, now get back to work."