Why talk of illness entrenches discrimination

Author:

Sayce Liz

Abstract

Purpose – Biological understandings of mental illness are promoted by both anti-stigma campaigners and increasingly by activists protesting against social security cuts. The purpose of this paper is to analyse the pitfalls of the “illness” conceptualisation for reducing discrimination, comments on divisions between those arguing for a right to work and those who seek a right not to work, and proposes bridge building and more effective messages, drawing on the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Design/methodology/approach – Review of relevant evidence on the effectiveness or lack of it of the “mental illness is an illness like any other” message in anti-stigma work, and discussion of grey literature from campaigners and bloggers. Findings – There is a growing body of evidence that the “illness like any other” message entrenches rather than reduces stigma and discrimination: this message should not be used in anti-discrimination work. At the same time some social security bloggers and campaigners have argued they are “sick” in order to resist efforts to compel them to seek work or face sanctions; whilst older disability rights campaigners have argued for the right to work. The paper argues for new bridge building and use of evidence based messages in campaigning. Research limitations/implications – This paper is based on review of evidence on the impact of using the “illness” message to reduce stigma and discrimination; and on discussion of campaigns and blogs. It is not based on a systematic review of campaigns. Practical implications – There is a need for campaigns that support rights holistically – the right to a decent standard of living and the right to work. This requires bridge building between activists, which could usefully be rooted in the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The “illness” conceptualisation is harmful to the effort to reduce stigma and discrimination. Mental health staff can act as allies to those they serve in securing all these rights. Originality/value – This is the only recent paper to analyse the evidence that the “illness like any other” message is harmful in anti-stigma work, together with its implications for the recent phenomenon of mental health campaigners moving from opposition to the medical model, to a new argument that they are “too sick” to work. This paper suggests ways forward for everyone with an interest in combatting stigma and discrimination.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Health (social science),Pshychiatric Mental Health,Psychiatry and Mental health

Reference15 articles.

1. Burns, T. (2013), Our Necessary Shadow: The Nature and Meaning of Psychiatry, Penguin Books, London.

2. Crowther, N. and Sayce, L. (2013), Taking Control of Employment Support, Disability Rights UK, London.

3. Henderson, C. and Thornicroft, G. (2013), “Evaluation of the time to change programme in England 2008-2011”, BJ Psych, Vol. 202 No. S55, pp. S45-S48.

4. Hewstone, M. (2003), “Intergroup contact: panacea for prejudice?”, The Psychologist, Vol. 16 No. 7, pp. 352-5.

5. Hill, D. and Bale, R. (1981), “Measuring beliefs about where psychological distress originates and who is responsible for its alleviation”, in Lefcourt, F. (Ed.), Research with the Locus of Control Construct, Vol. 2, Academic Press, New York, NY.

Cited by 3 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3