Discriminatory Practices in the German Mental Healthcare System: An Intersectional Grounded Theory Study.

IF 2.6 2区 医学 Q2 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
Neneh Rosalía Quadflieg, Patiani Batchati, Alva Träbert, Eike Leidgens, Georg Juckel, Jakov Gather, Amma Yeboah, Mirjam Faissner
{"title":"Discriminatory Practices in the German Mental Healthcare System: An Intersectional Grounded Theory Study.","authors":"Neneh Rosalía Quadflieg, Patiani Batchati, Alva Träbert, Eike Leidgens, Georg Juckel, Jakov Gather, Amma Yeboah, Mirjam Faissner","doi":"10.1177/10497323251325793","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Discriminatory practices within mental healthcare are a major barrier to the equitable provision of care to <i>all</i> mental healthcare service users. Understanding mechanisms of discrimination is a prerequisite for developing suitable measures to address them. Intersectionality, a framework rooted in Black feminism, has proven to be a powerful tool for understanding the specific forms and experiences of discrimination within interconnected systems of oppression. This study is the first to use an intersectional lens to examine discriminatory practices within the German mental healthcare system from the perspectives of service users, providers, and psychosocial counselors. In collaboration with local organizations in Bochum, Germany, we conducted 17 semi-structured interviews. The data were analyzed according to constructed grounded theory methodology. Our results indicate that discriminatory practices undermine access to and quality of healthcare delivery for marginalized mental healthcare service users. On an interpersonal level, these practices included stereotyping, devaluation, Othering, invalidation, silencing, withholding information, and treatment refusals. On an organizational level, care was undermined by a lack of interpretation services, discriminatory admission practices and documentation procedures, a lack of competencies among mental healthcare providers, as well as suitable treatment options and environments for marginalized service users. Service users described various strategies to navigate mental healthcare, including confrontation and selective narration. Mental healthcare providers showed various reactions toward discriminatory practices, ranging from defensiveness to acknowledgment. We discuss the results in their interrelationship with institutional Whiteness, cis-heteronormativity, and mental illness.</p>","PeriodicalId":48437,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Health Research","volume":" ","pages":"10497323251325793"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qualitative Health Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10497323251325793","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Discriminatory practices within mental healthcare are a major barrier to the equitable provision of care to all mental healthcare service users. Understanding mechanisms of discrimination is a prerequisite for developing suitable measures to address them. Intersectionality, a framework rooted in Black feminism, has proven to be a powerful tool for understanding the specific forms and experiences of discrimination within interconnected systems of oppression. This study is the first to use an intersectional lens to examine discriminatory practices within the German mental healthcare system from the perspectives of service users, providers, and psychosocial counselors. In collaboration with local organizations in Bochum, Germany, we conducted 17 semi-structured interviews. The data were analyzed according to constructed grounded theory methodology. Our results indicate that discriminatory practices undermine access to and quality of healthcare delivery for marginalized mental healthcare service users. On an interpersonal level, these practices included stereotyping, devaluation, Othering, invalidation, silencing, withholding information, and treatment refusals. On an organizational level, care was undermined by a lack of interpretation services, discriminatory admission practices and documentation procedures, a lack of competencies among mental healthcare providers, as well as suitable treatment options and environments for marginalized service users. Service users described various strategies to navigate mental healthcare, including confrontation and selective narration. Mental healthcare providers showed various reactions toward discriminatory practices, ranging from defensiveness to acknowledgment. We discuss the results in their interrelationship with institutional Whiteness, cis-heteronormativity, and mental illness.

德国精神卫生保健系统中的歧视性做法:交叉接地理论研究。
精神卫生保健中的歧视性做法是向所有精神卫生保健服务使用者公平提供护理的主要障碍。了解歧视机制是制定适当措施解决这些问题的先决条件。交织性是一个植根于黑人女权主义的框架,已被证明是理解相互关联的压迫系统中歧视的具体形式和经历的有力工具。本研究首次从服务使用者、提供者和心理咨询师的角度,使用交叉视角来检查德国精神卫生保健系统中的歧视性做法。我们与德国波鸿的当地组织合作,进行了17次半结构化访谈。根据已构建的扎根理论方法对数据进行分析。我们的研究结果表明,歧视性做法破坏了边缘化精神卫生保健服务使用者获得卫生保健服务的机会和质量。在人际层面上,这些做法包括刻板印象、贬低、他人、无效、沉默、隐瞒信息和拒绝治疗。在组织层面上,由于缺乏口译服务、歧视性的入院做法和文件程序、精神保健提供者缺乏能力以及为边缘化服务使用者提供适当的治疗选择和环境,护理工作受到损害。服务用户描述了导航心理健康的各种策略,包括对抗和选择性叙述。精神卫生保健提供者对歧视行为表现出不同的反应,从防御到承认。我们讨论的结果,在他们的相互关系与制度白人,顺异性规范,和精神疾病。
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
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
6.20%
发文量
109
期刊介绍: QUALITATIVE HEALTH RESEARCH is an international, interdisciplinary, refereed journal for the enhancement of health care and to further the development and understanding of qualitative research methods in health care settings. We welcome manuscripts in the following areas: the description and analysis of the illness experience, health and health-seeking behaviors, the experiences of caregivers, the sociocultural organization of health care, health care policy, and related topics. We also seek critical reviews and commentaries addressing conceptual, theoretical, methodological, and ethical issues pertaining to qualitative enquiry.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信