Steve (2025): Burnout, Male Depression, and Institutional Mirroring — A Psychological Analysis

The film Steve (Mielants, 2025), available on Netflix and adapted from Max Porter's short novel Shy (2023), offers a rare and clinically relevant portrayal of some of the most pressing challenges in contemporary mental health: burnout among care professionals, moral injury in underfunded institutional settings, atypical presentations of adolescent male depression, and the phenomena of mirroring and countertransference in caregiving relationships. Through an analysis of the film's principal psychological themes, this article aims to provide a scientifically grounded reading of a cinematic work that interrogates — without presuming to answer — some of the most urgent questions facing anyone working or training in the field of clinical and developmental psychology.

Introduction

Cinema has long represented a privileged space for exploring the human condition, and psychology has found in many films a rich source of reflection (Wedding & Boyd, 1999). Steve (Mielants, 2025), with Cillian Murphy in the title role, stands out in recent cinema for the density and precision with which it addresses mental health themes — both individual and organisational — without veering into sensationalism or oversimplification.

The film follows a single twenty-four-hour day in the life of Steve, headteacher of a secure residential school for adolescents with complex needs, set in rural Cornwall in the 1990s. The narrative structure — unified in time, space, and action, according to the three Aristotelian unities — is not a neutral formal choice: it amplifies the sense of entrapment, of a present that leaves no room for reflection or recovery (Walker & Walker, 2026). The handheld camera, the relentless editing, the timestamps that mark the hours like a countdown: everything conspires to build a visual experience that is itself a simulation of the protagonist's mental state.

As Walker and Walker (2026) observe in a clinical review published in BJPsych Bulletin, the film accurately depicts the interplay between adolescent distress and staff exhaustion, offering a rare window into the psychological effects of caregiving under conditions of chronic stress. This article explores five principal thematic areas: professional burnout and moral injury, compartmentalisation as a defensive mechanism, addiction as a maladaptive response to emotional dysregulation, atypical presentations of adolescent male depression, and the phenomenon of institutional mirroring between caregivers and service users.

Professional Burnout and Moral Injury in Care Settings

Steve's response when the documentary filmmaker asks him to describe himself in three words is "very, very tired" (Walker & Walker, 2026). This is not physical fatigue. It is the exhaustion of someone who has ceased to believe their resources are adequate to the task they have been given. It is, in clinical terms, the core of professional burnout.

Maslach and Leiter (1997) define burnout as a three-dimensional syndrome characterised by emotional exhaustion, depersonalisation, and a diminished sense of personal efficacy. Among mental health and care professionals, these dimensions manifest with alarming frequency, often amplified by systemic conditions such as resource scarcity, bureaucratic pressure, and inadequate supervision (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007). In the film, Steve is not a fragile individual who has simply given way: he is a competent, passionate professional operating within a chronically underfunded system, facing progressive staff cuts and — as revealed in one of the narrative's most devastating scenes — the imminent prospect of the school's closure.

This scenario directly evokes the concept of moral injury, originally developed in military contexts by Shay (1994) and subsequently applied to healthcare settings. Talbot and Dean (2018) have argued compellingly that healthcare professionals are not simply "burning out": they are suffering a moral wound — the dissonance between the ethical values that guided their professional choice and the real conditions in which they are forced to work. Moral injury is distinguished from burnout precisely because it involves a values dimension: it is not merely exhaustion, but the perception of betraying oneself and one's patients every day, not through lack of will but through structural impossibility.

Walker and Walker (2026) identify in the film a faithful representation of this phenomenon, highlighting how the scene in which staff are informed of the school's imminent closure constitutes a moment of particular dramatic and clinical intensity. The question that hangs in the air: What will happen to these boys? — is precisely the question that generates moral injury: when you know that your system is about to abandon those who have nowhere else to go.

Compartmentalisation as a Defensive Mechanism

One of the most narratively compelling elements of Steve is the brief but significant glimpse into the protagonist's domestic life. In absolute contrast to the chaos of the school, his home appears serene, ordered, almost surreal in its normality. This is a deliberate directorial choice, and Walker and Walker (2026) identify it as the cinematic representation of a widely documented defence mechanism: compartmentalisation.

Compartmentalisation is a form of cognitive and emotional isolation through which an individual separates incompatible aspects of their experience, preventing their conscious integration (Vaillant, 1992). Among care professionals, this mechanism often serves an adaptive function in the short term: it allows one to "leave work at work" and maintain an acceptable quality of life outside the professional context. However, research suggests that when compartmentalisation becomes rigid and chronic, it can prevent the processing of accumulated distress, paradoxically contributing to the worsening of burnout (Gross, 1998).

In the film, the separation between Steve-headteacher and Steve-father/husband is not integration: it is functional dissociation. The secret that gradually surfaces in the narrative — the addiction — is precisely what compartmentalisation has failed to contain. When the defensive mechanism breaks down, it does not break down silently: it breaks outward, into behaviour.

This dynamic reflects what the literature on self-care among mental health professionals describes as the caregiver paradox: those trained to recognise distress in others are often the least capable of recognising it in themselves (Barnett et al., 2007). Care training rarely includes adequate training in self-care, and the film enacts this with precision.

Addiction as a Maladaptive Response to Emotional Dysregulation

Steve's addiction emerges progressively throughout the film, not as an isolated dramatic element but as the coherent development of everything that precedes it. It is precisely this narrative coherence that makes it psychologically significant: it is not a vice, it is a response.

Khantzian's (1997) model, known as the self-medication hypothesis, proposes that many forms of problematic substance use represent attempts at self-medication in response to painful affective states that are otherwise unmanageable. In individuals with limited access to adaptive emotion regulation strategies — or in contexts that offer no legitimate space for the processing of distress — substances can temporarily serve a regulatory function: they reduce hyperactivation of the autonomic nervous system, attenuate rumination, and lower the threshold of emotional pain.

This perspective does not aim to remove responsibility from those who develop an addiction, but to understand its psychological function within a broader system. In Steve's case, the broader system is an institution that demands everything — empathy, presence, containment, decision-making — while offering nothing equivalent in terms of support, supervision, or recognition. The addiction is not the cause of the collapse: it is the signal that the collapse has been underway for some time.

Koob and Volkow (2016) describe the addiction cycle as characterised by three progressively self-reinforcing stages — intoxication, withdrawal/negative affect, and preoccupation/anticipation. What strikes in the film's portrayal of Steve is that the film does not show the intoxication, but the negative effect: the exhaustion, the irritability, the sense of emptiness. The substance is almost a detail. What the film places at its centre is the pain that precedes it.

Adolescent Male Depression: An Atypical Presentation

If Steve is the heart of the film, Shy — played by Jay Lycurgo — is its soul. Adapted from the eponymous protagonist of Porter's novel (2023), Shy is an adolescent who carries a history of abandonment, family rejection, and emotional isolation. When the documentary filmmaker asks for his three words, he replies: "depressed, angry, and bored" (Walker & Walker, 2026).

This triad warrants clinical attention. Popular representations of depression — in media and in collective imagination alike — privilege sadness, crying, and silent social withdrawal. In clinical reality, and particularly in male and adolescent depression, the presentation is often radically different. Addis (2008) has documented how depression in men frequently manifests through irritability, anger, risk-taking behaviour, substance use, and pervasive boredom — masks that conceal the depressive core and make both self-identification and clinical recognition more difficult.

This invisibility has real consequences. Möller-Leimkühler (2003) analysed the phenomenon of the male depressive syndrome, highlighting how traditional diagnostic criteria — developed predominantly on female samples — tend to underestimate depression in men. The result is a silent epidemic: men become depressed but are not diagnosed, do not seek help, and do not receive treatment. Male suicide rates — significantly higher than female rates in almost all Western countries (World Health Organization, 2021) — are in part the product of this diagnostic invisibility.

Shy is, in this sense, a clinically accurate character. He does not explicitly ask for help. His suffering expresses itself through anger, conflict with peers, and the rejection of relationships. His family history — the progressive withdrawal of his mother and stepfather, culminating in the decision to cut off all contact with him (Walker & Walker, 2026) — is consistent with the literature on adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and their impact on emotional and relational development (Felitti et al., 1998). Steve's school is not merely a place of containment: for Shy, it is the only space in which his existence is recognised as worthy of attention.

Institutional Mirroring and Countertransference in Care Settings

One of the most refined aspects of Steve — both from a directorial and a psychological standpoint — is the systematic construction of a parallel between the inner world of the adult protagonist and that of the adolescents in his care. Tim Mielants builds this mirror effect deliberately, and film criticism has noted it with precision (Blackford, 2025; Stephenson, 2025).

From a psychoanalytic and psychological perspective, this phenomenon evokes the concept of institutional mirroring (Obholzer & Roberts, 1994): the tendency of care systems to reproduce internally the emotional dynamics of the users they serve. Institutions working with traumatised, dysregulated, or crisis-prone individuals are particularly vulnerable to this process: the emotional chaos of service users infiltrates the system, generating parallel reactions in staff — anxiety, helplessness, aggression, withdrawal.

Obholzer and Roberts (1994) describe how care institutions often develop social defences — organisational and behavioural structures that protect staff from the anxiety generated by contact with the suffering of those they serve, but which simultaneously reduce the capacity for adequate clinical response. In the film, these defences are visible: the bureaucracy, the meetings, the documentation — and, in a deeper sense, the staff's dark humour, the normalisation of chaos, the habituation to emergency.

The Freudian concept of countertransference — originally conceived as an obstacle to therapy and subsequently reappraised as a valuable clinical instrument (Heimann, 1950) — is particularly relevant for reading the relationship between Steve and Shy. Steve is not a detached practitioner: he identifies with these boys, loves them, and this emotional proximity is both the source of his effectiveness as an educator and the vector of his psychological vulnerability. Contemporary research on countertransference in institutional settings suggests that the capacity to recognise and make use of one's own emotional reactions — rather than suppressing or acting upon them — is a determining factor in the quality of care (Norcross & Lambert, 2019).

Implications for Training and Clinical Practice

Steve is not a manual. It offers no solutions, prescribes no protocols, and does not conclude on an easy note of hope. It is, as Murphy himself has said, a film that asks questions (Stephenson, 2025). And it is precisely this interrogative quality that makes it useful for psychological training.

The literature on the training of mental health professionals has identified vicarious emotional experience — the processing of one's own emotional reactions in response to clinically relevant material — as a significant tool for professional development (Figley, 1995). Screening Steve in training contexts could open discussions on themes that often remain at the margins of academic curricula: professional self-care, moral injury, the management of countertransference, the recognition of male depression, and the role of institutions in either protecting or eroding their workers.

Walker and Walker (2026) conclude their clinical review by noting that the film is a reminder of the functional and psychological cost of under-resourcing services, both for staff and service users. This cost is not abstract: it has faces, stories, and three words.

"Very, very tired." "Depressed, angry, and bored."

Two sets of three words. Two people — an adult and an adolescent — who the system has placed in the same room, hoping they might save each other. The film does not tell us whether they do. Perhaps that is the most honest question a work about mental health can ask.

References

Addis, M. E. (2008). Gender and depression in men. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 15(3), 153–168. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2850.2008.00125.x

Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The job demands-resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(3), 309–328. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940710733115

Barnett, J. E., Baker, E. K., Elman, N. S., & Schoener, G. R. (2007). In pursuit of wellness: The self-care imperative. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 38(6), 603–612. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.38.6.603

Blackford, S. (2025, November 8). Steve (2025) or, a day in the life of the lost and bewildered. Medium. https://medium.com/@stephenblackford561/steve-2025-or-a-day-in-the-life-of-the-lost-and-bewildered-9576fba9a0c4

Felitti, V. J., Anda, R. F., Nordenberg, D., Williamson, D. F., Spitz, A. M., Edwards, V., Koss, M. P., & Marks, J. S. (1998). Relationship of childhood abuse and household dysfunction to many of the leading causes of death in adults: The Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) study. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 14(4), 245–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-3797(98)00017-8

Figley, C. R. (1995). Compassion fatigue: Coping with secondary traumatic stress disorder in those who treat the traumatized. Brunner/Mazel.

Gross, J. J. (1998). The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative review. Review of General Psychology, 2(3), 271–299. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.271

Heimann, P. (1950). On counter-transference. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 31, 81–84.

Khantzian, E. J. (1997). The self-medication hypothesis of substance use disorders: A reconsideration and recent applications. Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 4(5), 231–244. https://doi.org/10.3109/10673229709030550

Koob, G. F., & Volkow, N. D. (2016). Neurobiology of addiction: A neurocircuitry analysis. The Lancet Psychiatry, 3(8), 760–773. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(16)00104-8

Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. P. (1997). The truth about burnout: How organizations cause personal stress and what to do about it. Jossey-Bass.

Mielants, T. (Director). (2025). Steve [Film]. Netflix.

Möller-Leimkühler, A. M. (2003). The gender gap in suicide and premature death or: Why are men so vulnerable? European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, 253(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00406-003-0397-6

Norcross, J. C., & Lambert, M. J. (2019). Psychotherapy relationships that work: Vol. 1. Evidence-based therapist contributions (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.

Obholzer, A., & Roberts, V. Z. (Eds.). (1994). The unconscious at work: Individual and organizational stress in the human services. Routledge.

Porter, M. (2023). Shy. Faber & Faber.

Shay, J. (1994). Achilles in Vietnam: Combat trauma and the undoing of character. Atheneum.

Stephenson, L. (2025, October 12). Steve: A look at men's mental health through a new lens. The Gryphon. https://www.thegryphon.co.uk/2025/10/12/steve-a-look-at-mens-mental-health-through-a-new-lens/

Talbot, S. G., & Dean, W. (2018, July 26). Physicians aren't 'burning out.' They're suffering from moral injury. STAT News. https://www.statnews.com/2018/07/26/physicians-not-burning-out-they-are-suffering-moral-injury/

Vaillant, G. E. (1992). Ego mechanisms of defense: A guide for clinicians and researchers. American Psychiatric Press.

Walker, F., & Walker, G. (2026). Steve film review. BJPsych Bulletin. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjb.2025.10200

Wedding, D., & Boyd, M. A. (1999). Movies and mental illness: Using films to understand psychopathology. McGraw-Hill.

World Health Organization. (2021). Suicide worldwide in 2019: Global health estimates. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240026643