Print

Print


Although it has taken me a while to respond, I wanted to mention that I have found this a useful thread.  thanks also to Mark for his societal case formulation, which I have already forwarded to my psychology colleagues at work.  Many of you probably know of this book which also outlines a schema for social constructionist and social oppression type formulations:
 
Formulation in Psychology and Psychotherapy (Paperback)
by
Rudi Dallos (Editor), Lucy Johnstone (Editor)
 
I am interested in interrogating the idea of 'resistance' though (perhaps another of those undertheorised concepts which clinical psychologists seize on rather uncritically).  I guess the concept refers to some of Foucault's ideas about resistance.  My understanding is that this concept was developed fairly late on in his work, as a response to criticism that his analytical approach is very gloomy about the possibility for progressive change as people are put in the rather passive position of being determined through discursive practices.  Foucault wrote:  'there is no discourse without resistance', but empirical analyses using his methods have tended to talk about how attempts at resistance are likely to reinscribe the actor back within the prevailing oppressive discourse.  If you are on in hospital on a section and refuse to take your meds it is an act of resistance, but it wont get you very far...
 
In my own work I've been influenced by the solution-focused ideas of looking for competence, for resources and supporting people (and communities) to do more of 'what works' according to them.  Social actors themselves might not see these sorts of responses as 'resistance' at all and there may well be examples of accomodation, and adaptation to what might seem to us, as right-thinking therapists, oppressive systems.  Maybe this comes back to the question of who decides what is best for 'the oppressed'.  I've been doing some reading with some friends about this - Ranciere (very hard) and Friere (when will he come back in fashion?).  I'd be interested in any more ideas about these issues.  Maybe I should write this up for Forum - Craig, if you finish your piece I'll respond to it!
 
Deborah

 
----- Original Message -----
From: [log in to unmask] href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">Craig Newnes
To: [log in to unmask] href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 2:34 PM
Subject: On reflection

Given the nature of some of the postings referencing various authors (idealists/inspirations) I wondered about the various ideological paradigms people on the list live within. Then, lo and behold, I came across the following intended to be the opening of an article which remains unfinished/dead.
 

Clinical Psychology Trainees up and down the land are encouraged to keep reflective diaries.

 

At a recent training day on Harmful Clinical Psychology one intelligent, probably gifted, trainee said she had never had a conversation about Capitalism. I used the word ‘eugenics’ at one point and half the room looked blank. So that’s the labour market and the history of psychology gone from any trainee perspective in one. Another trainee said she just wrote down her thoughts ‘What paradigm do you use for those reflections?’, I asked, “Political, economic, social, psychological…?” “I just write down my thoughts”, she repeated. So I challenged her to record her thoughts concerning three clinical sessions using a basic economic paradigm – what she gets paid relative to her client, whether the client uses public transport by necessity, what strata of housing and employment the client finds herself in – that kind of thing. I didn’t complicate it by asking her to think about her role as a Bourgeoisie exploiting the proletariat. I don’t even know if the trainee was able to use an economic paradigm but at least it’s a way to structure her reflections.

 

In terms of harm very few clinical psychologists seem to reflect on the harm they might be doing to the people they see, on the harmful systems involving diagnosis, incarceration, pharmacology they might be employed within. This kind of reflection includes the possibility of starting from the position that the psychologist is mostly in the business of helping themselves, not others; helping others then becomes, reasonably enough, an accidental bi-product of looking after No. 1. It’s not comfortable – but it keeps the debate alive.

 

Craig

___________________________________ COMMUNITYPSYCHUK - The discussion list for community psychology in the UK. To unsubscribe or to change your details visit the website: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/COMMUNITYPSYCHUK.HTML For any problems or queries, contact the list moderator Rebekah Pratt on [log in to unmask] or Grant Jeffrey on [log in to unmask]

___________________________________ COMMUNITYPSYCHUK - The discussion list for community psychology in the UK. To unsubscribe or to change your details visit the website: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/COMMUNITYPSYCHUK.HTML For any problems or queries, contact the list moderator Rebekah Pratt on [log in to unmask] or Grant Jeffrey on [log in to unmask]