Advertisement

When ‘Participation’ Is Not Enough: Social Justice Practices in Mental Health and Psychiatric Hegemony

  • Emma TserisEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

The activist notion, ‘nothing about us, without us’, is a cornerstone critique of the narrow, individualising, and pathologising ideas about distress that are contained within biomedical constructions of ‘mental illness’. The inclusion of the experiential knowledge of people who have been on the receiving end of mental health services within mental health research has received widespread praise as an empowering and inclusive alternative to medical paternalism. However, the use of ‘lived experience’ narratives should not be seen as a panacea for socially unjust outcomes, and this chapter explores the limits of ‘participation’ in mental health research and educational contexts. A major hazard is the worrying tendency for the voices of service users to be co-opted by conventional professional agenda, reducing their radical and politicising potential.

Notes

Acknowledgement

I would like to express my gratitude to Sandy Hart, for her invaluable contributions to the analysis and arguments made within this chapter.

References

  1. Ben-Moshe, L. (2017). “The institution yet to come”: Analysing incarceration through a disability lens. In L. J. Davis (Ed.), The disability studies reader. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Cohen, B. (2015). Mental health user narratives. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  3. Cohen, B. (2016). Psychiatric hegemony: A Marxist theory of mental illness. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Costa, L., Voronka, J., Landry, D., Reid, J., McFarlane, B., Reville, D., & Church, K. (2012). Recovering our stories: A small act of resistance. Studies in Social Justice, 6(1), 85–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Fernandes, S. (2016). Curated stories: The uses and misuses of storytelling. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Gambrill, E. (2014). The diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders as a major form of dehumanization in the modern world. Research on Social Work Practice, 24, 13–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Grodofsky, M., & Gutman, C. (2017). Social work undergraduates and service users as co-learners and researchers. Social Work Education, 36(2), 141–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hall, W. (2016). Outside mental health: Voices and visions of madness. Northampton: Madness Radio.Google Scholar
  9. Hughes, M. (2017). What difference does it make? Findings of an impact study of service user and carer involvement on social work students’ subsequent practice. Social Work Education, 36(2), 203–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Karban, K. (2017). Developing a health inequalities approach for mental health social work. British Journal of Social Work, 47(3), 885–992.Google Scholar
  11. LeFrancois, B. A., Menzies, R. J., & Reaume, G. (Eds.). (2013). Mad matters: A critical reader in Canadian mad studies. Toronto: Canadian Scholars’ Press.Google Scholar
  12. Levy, S., Aiton, R., Doig, J., Dow, J., Brown, S., Hunter, L., & McNeil, R. (2016). Outcomes focused user involvement in social work education: Applying knowledge to practice. Social Work Education, 8, 866–877.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Malcoe, L., & Morrrow, M. (2017). Introduction: Science, social (in)justice, and mental health. In L. Malcoe & M. Morrow (Eds.), Critical inquiries for social justice in mental health (pp. 3–32). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  14. Maylea, C., & Hirsch, A. (2017). The right to refuse: The Victorian Mental Health Act 2014 and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Alternative Law Journal, 42(2), 149–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Meriluoto, T. (2019). ‘The will to not be empowered (according to your rules)’: Resistance in Finnish participatory social policy. Critical Social Policy, 39(1), 87–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Milton, D. E. (2014). Autistic expertise: A critical reflection on the production of knowledge in autism studies. Autism, 18(7), 794–802.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. O’Farrell, C. (2005). Michel Foucault. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  18. O’Hagan, M. (2014). Madness made me. Wellington: Open Box.Google Scholar
  19. Our Consumer Place. (2016). Pluck, acceptance, defiance and fortitude: Telling mental illness stories to change the world. Retrieved from http://www.ourcommunity.com.au/files/ocp-stories2016.pdf
  20. Penney, D., & Prescott, L. (2016). The co-optation of survivor knowledge: The danger of substituted values and voice. In J. Russo & A. Sweeney (Eds.), Searching for a Rose Garden: Challenging psychiatry, fostering mad studies. Monmouth: PCCS Books.Google Scholar
  21. Poole, J. M., Jivra, T., Arslanian, A., Bellows, K., Chiasson, S., Hakimy, H., et al. (2012). Sanism, “mental health” and social work/education: A review and call to action. Intersectionalities: A Global Journal of Social Work Analysis, Research, Polity and Practice, 1, 20–36.Google Scholar
  22. Probst, B. (2014). In the hyphen: Perceptions, benefits, and challenges of social workers’ dual identity as clinician-client. Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Social Services, 95(1), 25–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Romme, M., Escher, S., Dillon, J., Corstens, D., & Morris, M. (2009). Living with voices: 50 stories of recovery. Herefordshire: PCCS Books.Google Scholar
  24. Russo, J., & Beresford, P. (2015). Between exclusion and colonisation: Seeking a place for mad people’s knowledge in academia. Disability and Society, 30(1), 153–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sawyer, A. (2008). Risk and new exclusions in community mental health practice. Australian Social Work, 61(4), 327–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Wang, C. (1999). Photovoice: A participatory action research strategy applied to women’s health. Journal of Women’s Health, 8(2), 185–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The University of SydneySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations