The Politics of Mental Illness and Involvement—<i>A Discourse Analysis of Danish Anti-Stigma and Social Inclusion Campaigns</i>

Abstract

The present study is a part of a broader multisited field study on involvement of relatives in Danish psychiatry. The article aims to elucidate which political classifications of normality and mental illness that are displayed in two health political campaigns regarding anti-stigmatization and social inclusion and how such classifications co-constitute the subjectivity of individuals suffering from mental illness and their relatives. Drawing on a discourse theoretical perspective laid out by political theorists Laclau and Mouffe, we analyze how the campaigns bring into effect a weak and ineffective subject of deviance and how it is constituted by a subject of normality characterized by opposing traits. The article takes up the discussion of how the campaigns' articulations of the subjects of normality and deviance are imbedded in a hegemonic discourse of neoliberalism and individualism that asserts involvement as an expanded division of responsibility for the identification, classification and regulation of mentally ill subjects between public and private spheres of the Danish welfare state.

Patient participation in mental health care – perspectives of healthcare professionals: an integrative review

“…However, participation is expected to result in a better recovery process and strengthens empowerment, self-control and self-efficacy, and promotes quality of life (Document 1-7). In accordance with existing research, patient participation can be considered a new paradigm within a neoliberalist logic, which involves promoting the patient's ability to become an independent, responsible and healthy individual, but also offers some challenges for healthcare professionals to anchor involvement culture (2,32,33).…”

Recovery‐oriented practice: Participant observations of the interactions between patients and health professionals in mental health inpatient settings

“…Moving towards recovery-oriented practice in the mental health services is challenging and requires substantial and comprehensive changes in the organizational structures and procedures that go beyond supplementing already existing practices (Shepherd et al 2008). When not integrated into the foundation of the clinical practice, the provision of recovery-oriented practice risks being modified into something that corresponds with the existing culture rather than changing it (Karlsson & Borg 2017;Oute et al 2015;Slade et al 2012).…”

Recovery orientation in mental health inpatient settings: Inpatient experiences?

“…Some have argued that the mental health services’ adoption of personal recovery has merely formed a hybrid model of the concept that continues to favour more traditional notions of mental health treatment as focused primarily on medical symptom relief (Oute et al . ,b). Our results seem to justify this concern, given the important call for equal and respectful dialogue with health professionals, and the predominance of the medical paradigm, whether accepted by inpatients or not.…”