Polarisation and political correctness: Subtle barriers to consumer participation in mental health services

B. Happell
{"title":"Polarisation and political correctness: Subtle barriers to consumer participation in mental health services","authors":"B. Happell","doi":"10.5172/jamh.7.3.150","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The expectation that consumers and carers are active participants in all aspects of mental health service delivery has been a feature of Australian national mental health policy for more than a decade. More recently consumer and carer involvement has tended to broaden to incorporate education and research roles. While advancements in consumer and carer participation have been made, barriers to maximising the potential of these initiatives have been identified. The negative attitudes of mental health professionals have consistently been recognised as a major impediment to effective consumer and carer participation. Mental health professionals have been described as discriminatory and stigmatising towards consumers of mental health services. The aim of this paper is to consider the potential impact of attitudes that are less obviously negative and therefore arguably all the more powerful. The polarisation of consumers into opposites on the basis of their level of activity, and political correctness carried to the extreme, can render consumer advocacy as inappropriate or ineffective and therefore present major obstacles to consumer activity. Examples of polarisation and political correctness are presented and discussed in terms of their possible undermining of consumer led initiatives.","PeriodicalId":358240,"journal":{"name":"Australian e-Journal for the Advancement of Mental Health","volume":"44 7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"32","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian e-Journal for the Advancement of Mental Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5172/jamh.7.3.150","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 32

Abstract

Abstract The expectation that consumers and carers are active participants in all aspects of mental health service delivery has been a feature of Australian national mental health policy for more than a decade. More recently consumer and carer involvement has tended to broaden to incorporate education and research roles. While advancements in consumer and carer participation have been made, barriers to maximising the potential of these initiatives have been identified. The negative attitudes of mental health professionals have consistently been recognised as a major impediment to effective consumer and carer participation. Mental health professionals have been described as discriminatory and stigmatising towards consumers of mental health services. The aim of this paper is to consider the potential impact of attitudes that are less obviously negative and therefore arguably all the more powerful. The polarisation of consumers into opposites on the basis of their level of activity, and political correctness carried to the extreme, can render consumer advocacy as inappropriate or ineffective and therefore present major obstacles to consumer activity. Examples of polarisation and political correctness are presented and discussed in terms of their possible undermining of consumer led initiatives.
两极分化和政治正确:消费者参与心理健康服务的微妙障碍
十多年来,期望消费者和护理人员积极参与心理健康服务提供的各个方面,这是澳大利亚国家心理健康政策的一个特点。最近,消费者和护理人员的参与倾向于扩大到包括教育和研究角色。虽然在消费者和护理人员参与方面取得了进展,但已经确定了最大限度地发挥这些举措潜力的障碍。精神卫生专业人员的消极态度一直被认为是阻碍消费者和护理人员有效参与的主要因素。心理健康专业人员被描述为对心理健康服务的消费者具有歧视性和污名化。本文的目的是考虑那些不太明显的消极态度的潜在影响,因此可以说是更强大的。根据消费者的活动水平将其两极分化为对立面,并将政治正确推向极端,可能使消费者宣传不适当或无效,因此对消费者活动构成重大障碍。两极分化和政治正确的例子在他们可能破坏消费者主导的倡议方面被提出和讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信