De/Medicalisation is not the problem: On the idea of a "law clinic" for people experiencing housing instability and homelessness.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Health Pub Date : 2026-05-24 DOI:10.1177/13634593261453461
Stefanie Plage, Kirsten Baker, Nancy Sturman
{"title":"De/Medicalisation is not the problem: On the idea of a \"law clinic\" for people experiencing housing instability and homelessness.","authors":"Stefanie Plage, Kirsten Baker, Nancy Sturman","doi":"10.1177/13634593261453461","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>De/Medicalisation has become a staple of medical sociology to make sense of social issues at the intersection of health and illness. Broadly understood as the processes through which issues assume qualities that locate them within or beyond the remit of medicine, de/medicalisation continues to inform theoretical innovation and empirical research. The emergence of law clinics for people experiencing housing instability and homelessness offers a case study of how de/medicalisation can enrich the analysis of problems at the interstices of health and social care. Law clinics, often co-located or attached to primary and tertiary health care settings, aim to augment housing, health, wellness and social care offerings. Yet, this proximity - conceptual and spatial - may inadvertently reify understandings of homelessness as an individual pathology while aiming to offer pragmatic support to people who are otherwise excluded from core institutions in society. We present findings from a Roundtable with participants from law, social and health care professions and interviews with people experiencing housing instability (<i>n</i> = 27), lawyers, GPs and social workers (<i>n</i> = 10) in an Australian urban centre. In the vexed dynamics of the law clinic in-between different professions, de/medicalisation emerges as boundary-making and boundary-crossing to negotiate responsibilities, classify problems and reconcile competing logics.</p>","PeriodicalId":12944,"journal":{"name":"Health","volume":" ","pages":"13634593261453461"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13634593261453461","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

De/Medicalisation has become a staple of medical sociology to make sense of social issues at the intersection of health and illness. Broadly understood as the processes through which issues assume qualities that locate them within or beyond the remit of medicine, de/medicalisation continues to inform theoretical innovation and empirical research. The emergence of law clinics for people experiencing housing instability and homelessness offers a case study of how de/medicalisation can enrich the analysis of problems at the interstices of health and social care. Law clinics, often co-located or attached to primary and tertiary health care settings, aim to augment housing, health, wellness and social care offerings. Yet, this proximity - conceptual and spatial - may inadvertently reify understandings of homelessness as an individual pathology while aiming to offer pragmatic support to people who are otherwise excluded from core institutions in society. We present findings from a Roundtable with participants from law, social and health care professions and interviews with people experiencing housing instability (n = 27), lawyers, GPs and social workers (n = 10) in an Australian urban centre. In the vexed dynamics of the law clinic in-between different professions, de/medicalisation emerges as boundary-making and boundary-crossing to negotiate responsibilities, classify problems and reconcile competing logics.

去医疗化不是问题:关于为住房不稳定和无家可归的人设立“法律诊所”的想法。
医学化(De/Medicalisation)已经成为医学社会学的主要内容,用以理解健康与疾病交叉的社会问题。广义上理解为问题在医学范围内或之外具有一定质量的过程,去医学化继续为理论创新和实证研究提供信息。针对住房不稳定和无家可归者的法律诊所的出现,提供了一个案例研究,说明去/医疗化如何能够丰富对卫生和社会保健之间的问题的分析。法律诊所通常位于同一地点或附属于初级和三级卫生保健机构,旨在增加住房、卫生、保健和社会保健服务。然而,这种接近——概念上的和空间上的——可能无意中具体化了对无家可归者作为一种个人病态的理解,同时旨在为那些被排除在社会核心机构之外的人提供务实的支持。我们介绍了来自法律、社会和卫生保健专业人士圆桌会议的调查结果,并采访了澳大利亚城市中心经历住房不稳定的人(n = 27)、律师、全科医生和社会工作者(n = 10)。在不同职业之间的法律诊所的令人烦恼的动态中,去医学化作为边界的建立和跨越而出现,以协商责任、分类问题和调和相互竞争的逻辑。
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
Health
Health Multiple-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Health: is published four times per year and attempts in each number to offer a mix of articles that inform or that provoke debate. The readership of the journal is wide and drawn from different disciplines and from workers both inside and outside the health care professions. Widely abstracted, Health: ensures authors an extensive and informed readership for their work. It also seeks to offer authors as short a delay as possible between submission and publication. Most articles are reviewed within 4-6 weeks of submission and those accepted are published within a year of that decision.
×
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
小红书