Women with serious mental illness (SMI) occupy a social position in which their experiences are simultaneously influenced by stigmatisation, institutionalisation and gendered dimensions of trauma and power. Women with SMI are stigmatised in society, pushed to the margins and left vulnerable to victimisation and rejection, particularly if hospitalised in psychiatric institutions. Using modified labelling theory, I investigate how women hospitalised with SMI, especially those who have histories of sexual abuse and trauma, experience sexuality and perceive men and masculinity. I extend modified labelling theory by empirically analysing the role of social status and power in the labelling process. Specifically, I focus on gender, and analyse interviews with 55 women in US psychiatric hospitals, focusing on gendered experiences of trauma, stigma and attitudes about sexuality. I show how trauma increases the salience of stigma and potential for retraumatisation, both of which are amplified by the institutional setting. I find meaningful differences in the narratives of women who have experienced trauma and those who have not. Modified labelling theory helps explain how labelling can perpetuate self‐stigma, which threatens women's self‐esteem, safety and trust in others. The intersection of these experiences extends modified labelling theory and may have profound implications for recovery.

Mental health services and psychiatric professional values have shifted in the past several decades toward a model of client autonomy and informed consent, at least in principle. However, it is unclear how much has changed in practice, particularly in cases where client behavior poses ethical challenges for clinicians. Drawing on the case of clients’ sexual behavior and contraception use, we examine whether sociological theories of “soft” coercion remain relevant (e.g., therapeutic social control; Horwitz 1982) in contemporary mental health treatment settings. Using structured interview data from 98 men and women with serious mental illness (SMI), we explore client experiences of choice, coercion, and the spaces that lie in between. Patterns in our data confirm Horwitz’s (1982) theory of therapeutic social control but also suggest directions for updating and extending it. Specifically, we identify four strategies used to influence client behavior: coercion, enabling, education, and conciliation. We find that most clients’ experiences reflect elements of ambiguous or limited autonomy, wherein compliance is achieved by invoking therapeutic goals. However, women with SMI disproportionately report experiencing intense persuasion and direct use or threat of force. We argue that it is critical to consider how ostensibly noncoercive and value-free interventions nonetheless reflect the goals and norms of dominant groups.

Can school-based sex education (SBSE) that reproduces structural inequalities simultaneously hold possibilities for meaningful and transformative experiences? In this article, we situate students' perspectives on stereotypes encountered in their school-based sexual education classes in the context of Deleuze and Guattari's work. The analysis is based on 63 interviews with high school students at two schools in the same district in the USA, one high-poverty/low-ranked, and the other, low-poverty/high-ranked. Our analysis reveals how adolescents attempt to resist stereotypes in SBSE while simultaneously creating meaning in their encounters. Deleuze and Guattari's concepts 'lines of flight' and 'deterritorialization and reterritorialization' allow us to examine resistance in a way Foucault's interpretation of power and discourse does not. We expand on these concepts and how they are significant in explaining adolescents' resistances in our analysis.

In light of the current spike in opioid addiction in upper middle-class white populations, we examine addiction treatment discourses on the webpages of public methadone clinics and private rehabilitation facilities through a critical theoretical lens. While both discourses exercise social control over opioid-addicted clients by regulating their everyday practices, we find classed differences in these discourses when they are aimed at differently socially located populations. Private treatment discourses trust clients to be led to a state of self-governance through a holistic transformation of ‘mind, body, and spirit’, while public clinics’ websites frame patients as unruly bodies that must be chemically rendered docile through medication before they can return to everyday life.

Traditionally, journalists, government agencies, and medical professionals have acted as mediators, facilitating the transfer of scientific knowledge from scientists to the general public. More recently, however, ordinary citizens are circumventing top-down mediation and contributing directly to discussions about scientific topics online. For the present study, we examined how these emerging mediators of online scientific information are shaping the discussion of hotly debated (at least within the public sphere) scientific topics, specifically, the alleged link between autism and the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine. Using content analysis, we have identified the resources that lay pro- and anti-vaccination knowledge contributors most often cite when making knowledge claims. Additionally, we examined how these contributors 1) use citations to legitimize their arguments; and, 2) take on particular roles in such arguments. Our results shed light on an emerging form of online science communication and the process by which knowledge contributed by ordinary citizens is shaping these online discussions. These findings have implications for online health information and health decision-making.