The hermeneutics of recovery
- Kong, Camillia, Campbell, Megan, Kpobi, Lily, Swartz, Leslie, Atuire, Caesar
- Authors: Kong, Camillia , Campbell, Megan , Kpobi, Lily , Swartz, Leslie , Atuire, Caesar
- Date: 2021
- Subjects: To be catalogued
- Language: English
- Type: text , article
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/302554 , vital:58207 , xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1177/13634615211000549"
- Description: The widespread use of faith-based and traditional healing for mental disorders within African contexts is well known. However, normative responses tend to fall within two camps: on one hand, those oriented towards the biomedical model of psychiatry stress the abuses and superstition of such healing, whilst critics adopting a more ‘local’ perspective have fundamentally challenged the universalist claims of biomedical diagnostic categories and psychiatric treatments. What seemingly emerges is a dichotomy between those who endorse more ‘universalist’ or ‘relativist’ approaches as an analytical lens to the challenges of the diverse healing strands within African contexts. In this article, we draw upon the resources of philosophy and existing empirical work to challenge the notion that constructive dialogue cannot be had between seemingly incommensurable healing practices in global mental health. First, we suggest the need for much-needed conceptual clarity to explore the hermeneutics of meaning, practice, and understanding, in order to forge constructive normative pathways of dialogue between seemingly incommensurable values and conceptual schemas around mental disorder and healing. Second, we contextualise the complex motives to emphasise difference amongst health practitioners within a competitive healing economy. Finally, we appeal to the notion of recovery as discovery as a fruitful conceptual framework which incorporates dialogue, comparative evaluation, and cross-cultural enrichment across divergent conceptualisations of mental health.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2021
- Authors: Kong, Camillia , Campbell, Megan , Kpobi, Lily , Swartz, Leslie , Atuire, Caesar
- Date: 2021
- Subjects: To be catalogued
- Language: English
- Type: text , article
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/302554 , vital:58207 , xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1177/13634615211000549"
- Description: The widespread use of faith-based and traditional healing for mental disorders within African contexts is well known. However, normative responses tend to fall within two camps: on one hand, those oriented towards the biomedical model of psychiatry stress the abuses and superstition of such healing, whilst critics adopting a more ‘local’ perspective have fundamentally challenged the universalist claims of biomedical diagnostic categories and psychiatric treatments. What seemingly emerges is a dichotomy between those who endorse more ‘universalist’ or ‘relativist’ approaches as an analytical lens to the challenges of the diverse healing strands within African contexts. In this article, we draw upon the resources of philosophy and existing empirical work to challenge the notion that constructive dialogue cannot be had between seemingly incommensurable healing practices in global mental health. First, we suggest the need for much-needed conceptual clarity to explore the hermeneutics of meaning, practice, and understanding, in order to forge constructive normative pathways of dialogue between seemingly incommensurable values and conceptual schemas around mental disorder and healing. Second, we contextualise the complex motives to emphasise difference amongst health practitioners within a competitive healing economy. Finally, we appeal to the notion of recovery as discovery as a fruitful conceptual framework which incorporates dialogue, comparative evaluation, and cross-cultural enrichment across divergent conceptualisations of mental health.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2021
Education versus screening
- Kong, Camillia, Efrem, Mehret, Campbell, Megan
- Authors: Kong, Camillia , Efrem, Mehret , Campbell, Megan
- Date: 2020
- Subjects: To be catalogued
- Language: English
- Type: text , article
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/302461 , vital:58198 , xlink:href="http:// 10.1136/medethics-2019-105396"
- Description: Informed consent procedures for participation in psychiatric genomics research among individuals with mental disorder and intellectual disability can often be unclear, particularly because the underlying ethos guiding consent tools reflects a core ethical tension between safeguarding and inclusion. This tension reflects important debates around the function of consent tools, as well as the contested legitimacy of decision-making capacity thresholds to screen potentially vulnerable participants. Drawing on human rights, person-centred psychiatry and supported decisionmaking, this paper problematises the use of consent procedures as screening tools in psychiatric genomics studies, particularly as increasing normative emphasis has shifted towards the empowerment and participation of those with mental disorder and intellectual disabilities. We expound on core aspects of supported decisionmaking, such as relational autonomy and hermeneutic competence, to orient consent procedures towards a more educative, participatory framework that is better aligned with developments in disability studies. The paper concludes with an acknowledgement of the pragmatic and substantive challenges in adopting this framework in psychiatric genomics studies if this participatory ethos towards persons with mental disorder and intellectual disability is to be fully realised.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2020
- Authors: Kong, Camillia , Efrem, Mehret , Campbell, Megan
- Date: 2020
- Subjects: To be catalogued
- Language: English
- Type: text , article
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/302461 , vital:58198 , xlink:href="http:// 10.1136/medethics-2019-105396"
- Description: Informed consent procedures for participation in psychiatric genomics research among individuals with mental disorder and intellectual disability can often be unclear, particularly because the underlying ethos guiding consent tools reflects a core ethical tension between safeguarding and inclusion. This tension reflects important debates around the function of consent tools, as well as the contested legitimacy of decision-making capacity thresholds to screen potentially vulnerable participants. Drawing on human rights, person-centred psychiatry and supported decisionmaking, this paper problematises the use of consent procedures as screening tools in psychiatric genomics studies, particularly as increasing normative emphasis has shifted towards the empowerment and participation of those with mental disorder and intellectual disabilities. We expound on core aspects of supported decisionmaking, such as relational autonomy and hermeneutic competence, to orient consent procedures towards a more educative, participatory framework that is better aligned with developments in disability studies. The paper concludes with an acknowledgement of the pragmatic and substantive challenges in adopting this framework in psychiatric genomics studies if this participatory ethos towards persons with mental disorder and intellectual disability is to be fully realised.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2020
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »