Toward an Alternative Account of Feminist Practice Ethics in Mental Health

Abstract

Theoretical work on feminist psychotherapy ethics has been useful in challenging conventional psychotherapy, but its narrative assumes that the therapeutic relationship is potentially benign. In contrast, feminists in public practice who work in settings that are closer to state power and social control must assume that therapy has the potential for malignancy, on the basis of the history of mental health and the state. Therefore, they require a conception of ethics that acknowledges the relationships of therapists and clients within a state apparatus. This article discusses the two types of ethics and stresses the need for ethics that are congruent with the locations in which therapists practice.

DSM-5 and beyond: A critical feminist engagement with psychodiagnosis

“…When we teach about psychodiagnosis, we can also teach about the historicity of categories of psychological disorder and of psychological knowledge more generally. We can also discuss with clinical trainees how the workaday language practices of mental health professionals (such as those Goicoechea describes) tacitly reaffirm the subordination of patients and uphold institutional power (Rossiter, et al, 1998).…”

Believers and Skeptics: Where Social Worker Situate Themselves Regarding the Code of Ethics

“…This given, we agree with Banks (1998) that, "Codes must be constantly discussed, debated, interpreted and reinterpreted" (p. 228). We would urge educators, as does Rossiter, de Boer, et al (1998), and professional associations, to encourage such dialogue. These questioning environments could pave the way for believers to take part in "problematizing" the principles within the code as well as potentially entertaining more "liberal" interpretations.…”

“…The skeptics, though appreciative of the social work endeavour, question whether the principles of social work as represented in the code are always in the best interests of clients. The skeptics claim that the code does not address the particular, the local, and the contextual, and that strict adherence leads to a disconnection with the client (i.e., lack of physical and emotional connection), as well as an obfuscation of power and justice issues that underlie client "problems" (e.g., further oppression through unfair social assistance policies), which are among the concerns expressed in the literature (Brown, 1994a;Rossiter, de Boer, et al, 1998).…”

“…How inclusive and just can conversations regarding ethical decision-making be when power imbalances abound? How open are agencies to providing "safe" space for such discourse regarding ethics as noted by Rossiter, de Boer, et al (1998)?…”

“…We had two thoughts about the views of these stakeholders. First, similar to what Rossiter, de Boer, et al (1998) note, this conversation could be seen as "non-violative" in that the social worker is supporting the client in a humanizing way by making overt the systemic implications of the situation and by trying to level the socioeconomic playing field; we consider this a move toward social justice.…”