Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Psychotherapy and distributive justice: a Rawlsian analysis

  • Scientific Contribution
  • Published:
Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper I outline an approach to the distribution of resources between psychotherapy modalities in the context of the UK’s health care system, using recent discussions of Cognitive Behavioural Psychotherapy as a way of highlighting resourcing issues. My main goal is to offer an approach that is just, and that accommodates the diversity of different schools of psychotherapy. In order to do this I draw extensively on the theories of Justice and of Political Liberalism developed by the late John Rawls, and adapt these to the particular requirements of psychotherapy resourcing. I explore some of the implications of this particular analysis, and consider how the principles of Rawlsian justice might translate into ground rules for deliberation and decision-making.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aldridge, S., and J. Pollard. 2005. Interim report to Department of health on Initial Mapping Project for Psychotherapy and Counselling. London: BACP. available on www.bacp.co.uk/regulation/DoH_interim-rep_jun05.doc. Accessed 7 June 2007.

  • Arthur, A. 2001. Personality, epistemology and psychotherapists choice of theoretical model: A review and analysis. European Journal of Psychotherapy Counselling and Health 4 (1): 45–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bateman, A., and P. Fonagy. 2000. Effectiveness of psychotherapeutic treatment of personality disorder. The British Journal of Psychiatry 177 (2): 138–143.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Beauchamp, T., and C. Childress. 2001. Principles of biomedical ethics, 5th edn. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, A., A. Rush, B. Shaw, and G. Emery. 1979. Cognitive therapy of depression. New York, NY: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berniker, E., and D. McNabb. 2006. Dialectical inquiry: A structured qualitative research method. Qualitative Report 11 (4): 643–664.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brechin, A., and M. Sidell. 2000. Ways of knowing. In Using evidence in health and social care. ed. R. Gomm and C. Davies, 3–25. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brockner, J., and P. Siegel. 1996. Understanding the interaction between procedural and distributive justice: the role of trust. In Trust in organizations, ed. R. Kramer and T. Tyler. New York, NY: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler, J. 1999. The ethics of health care rationing. London: Cassell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Churchman, C.W. 1971. The design of inquiring systems. New York, NY: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feltham, C. 1999. Against and beyond core theoretical models. In Controversies in psychotherapy and counseling, ed. C. Feltham, 182–193. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freud, S. 2005. Mourning and melancholia. In On murder, mourning and melancholia, ed. S. Freud, 201–218. London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garb, H. 1997. Race bias, social class bias and gender bias in clinical judgement. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice 4 (2): 99–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gelder, M., R. Mayou, and J. Geddes. 2002. Psychiatry. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, A., J. Mills, R. Mulhern, and N. Short. 2004. Cognitive behavioural therapy in mental health care. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grove, W., and P. Meehl. 1996. Comparative efficiency of informal (subjective, impressionistic) and formal (mechanical, algorithmic) prediction procedures: The clinical-statistical controversy. Psychology, Public Policy and Law 2 (2): 293–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heath, G. 2002. Philosophy and psychotherapy: Conflict or co-operation? International Journal of Psychotherapy 7 (1): 13–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, J. 1999. Psychotherapy as essential health care. In Controversies in psychotherapy and counseling, ed. C. Feltham, 278–286. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • James, O. 2006. Sanity’s shining light. Guardian 19th December. Available on www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1974953,00.html. Accessed 12 July 2007.

  • Layard, R. 2005. Therapy for all on the NHS. Sainsbury Centre Inaugural Lecture, September 2005. Available on www.existential-psychotherapy.com/layard_layard_lecture_120905.pdf. Accessed 25 July 2007.

  • Leichsenring, F., and E. Leibing. 2003. The effectiveness of psychodynamic therapy and cognitive behavior therapy in the treatment of personality disorders: A meta-analysis. American Journal of Psychiatry 160 (7): 1223–1232.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Linklater, A., and R. Harland. 2006. After Freud. Prospect June: 36–41.

  • Malhotra, Y. 2000. Knowledge management and virtual organisations. Hershey, PA: IGP.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGinn, L., and J. Young. 1996. Schema-focused therapy. In Frontiers of cognitive therapy. ed. P. Salkovskis, 182–207. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGinnis, S. 2006. Not all is CBT. Therapy Today April: 23.

  • Nuttall, J. 2002. Imperatives and perspective in psychotherapy integration. International Journal of Psychotherapy 7 (3): 249–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Collaborating Centre for Mental Health. 2004. Depression: Management of depression in primary and secondary care. National Clinical Practice Guideline Number 23. London: National Institute for Clinical Excellence.

  • O’Connor, J. 2003. Homelessness and the problem of containment. European Journal of Counselling, Psychotherapy and Health 6 (2): 111–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor, J. 2005. Between the street and the consulting room. European Journal of Counselling, Psychotherapy and Health 7 (4): 217–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polkinghorne, D. 2001. Managed care programs: What do clinicians need? In Critical issues in psychotherapy, ed. B. Slife, R. Williams, and S. Barlow, 121–140. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J. 1971. A theory of Justice. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J. 1993. Political liberalism. New York, NY: University of Columbia Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, T. 2006. Applying evidence-based practice. Therapy Today June: 14–17.

  • Roth, T., and P. Fonagy. 2005. What works for whom? A critical review of psychotherapy research. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryle, A., and I. Kerr. 2002. Introducing cognitive analytic therapy: Principles and practice. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spong, S., and H. Hollanders. 2003. Cognitive therapy and social power. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research 3 (3): 216–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wampold, B. 2001. The great psychotherapy debate: Models, methods and findings. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, H. 2002. The power and danger of pluralism in psychotherapy (Editorial). International Journal of Psychotherapy 7 (1): 5–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephen Wilmot.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wilmot, S. Psychotherapy and distributive justice: a Rawlsian analysis. Med Health Care and Philos 12, 67–75 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-008-9143-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-008-9143-1

Keywords

Navigation