Disabled & not normal

Abstract

The transition from being well and fully functioning to being suddenly disabled by an acquired brain injury (ABI) and having to start a recovery process has a huge impact on a person’s life and, presumably, identity. However, research is still sparse on the psychosocial consequences of ABI, and there is a lack of identity research based on interviews with clients, i.e. exploring how clients themselves construct their situations, and recovery processes following ABI. The present study aims to fill this gap by investigating identity (re‑)construction after ABI and possible changes throughout the recovery process. The data is part of a larger mixed-method longitudinal study and focuses on narrative identity constructions. This paper draws on interviews (semi-structured) with 42 Danish adults aged 18–66 years with moderate or severe ABI. The participants were interviewed twice. The first interview was conducted while they were hospitalized and the second one-year post injury in their own homes. This article describes the key patterns of identity construction in this cohort, and explores those patterns more explicitly through the use of a single case study. It investigates re-constructions of identity through self-narratives by appeal to methods of discourse analysis, drawing especially on the concept of positioning, and placing particular focus on changes and developmental processes in these self-narratives. The narrative re-constructions point to a developmental change of identity in the course of the different phases of the recovery process, including conflicting voices from society, service providers and other adults with ABI. Results will be discussed in the light of current identity research.

Still the same? – Self-identity dilemmas when living with post-stroke aphasia in a digitalised society

“…Thus, it seems that the stories of self told by the participants in this study are somewhat more complex than the ones told by the participants in Glintborg's study. On the other hand, our findings support Glintborg's (2015) findings regarding constancy/change. Our findings, as well as Glintborg's, show that the participants simultaneously are the same as pre-onset and changed.…”

“…Although we are not able to make any closer comparisons to Glintborg's (2015) study, since the linguistic capacity of her participants is unknown, our findings may add some complexity to her findings, regarding sameness/difference. The participants in her study stated being "disabled and not normal", but the participants of our study construct selfidentities in terms of both being "normal" and "disabled" (sometimes manifested as being neither "normal" nor "disabled").…”

“…emergent over time) dilemma (i). Bamberg's dilemmas were previously used as analytical tools by Glintborg (2015). Those participants constructed identities as both "disabled and no longer normal" and "not being changed", which supports the dilemma of constancy/change since they express both being changed in relation to their pre-onset selves and yet not being changed.…”

“…For example, Nochi (1998) and Wolfenden and Grace (2012) explicitly excluded people with aphasia. In other studies (e.g., Glintborg, 2015), issues of aphasia are simply ignored. The result of both these ways to exclude aphasia is that "we are left with limited understanding of the impact of the loss of the communication tool on narrative self" (Shadden, Hagstrom, & Koski, 2008, p. 11).…”

(Re)constructing identity following acquired brain injury: The complex journey of recovery after stroke

“…[29][30][31] The contribution of a narrative approach to identity is that it does not focus on a stable identity but on how people navigate this identity dilemma and the pragmatic implications, managing past and present into some more or less coherent whole, is echoed in narratives. 30 This kind of attention can improve the analysis of the elements useful to integrate accounts into more satisfied life narratives, to project a new sense of self and to improve health in terms of biographical continuity, as proposed also by the life thread model. 32 This knowledge can make a crucial contribution to both theory and practice psychology in dialogue with the field of neurological rehabilitation.…”