Methodology and mental illness: resistance and restorying

Area of Science:

• Social Sciences
• Psychology
• Sociology

Background:

• Traditional social justice concepts rely on a unified self, contrasting with modern understandings.
• Mental health social justice paradigms require methodologies that challenge traditional identity constructs.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare post-structuralist and narrative methodologies for developing a social justice paradigm in mental health.
• To evaluate their effectiveness in deconstructing professional knowledge and empowering service users.
• To examine the role of agency and potential for oppression within these frameworks.

Main Methods:

• Comparative analysis of post-structuralist and narrative research methodologies.
• Examination of how these approaches deconstruct professional knowledge and enable service user articulation.
• Analysis of the concept of agency in relation to social justice and emancipatory potential.

Main Results:

• Post-structuralism can deconstruct power structures and enable alternative discourses for service users.
• Narrative research offers emancipatory potential through subjective transformation via storytelling.
• Both methods risk imposing templates that can perpetuate oppression if not carefully interpreted.

Conclusions:

• Neither post-structuralism nor narrative research is inherently superior for social justice in mental health.
• Careful consideration of interpretation is crucial to harness their emancipatory potential and avoid reinforcing oppression.
• Developing ethical frameworks for interpreting service user stories is essential for genuine social justice.