 |
 |
Apologies for cross posting LIVING WITH SOCIAL CATEGORIES: ETHNICITY, MENTAL HEALTH, AND LEARNING DISABILITY IN AN AGE OF AUSTERITY 18 JUNE 2012 THE OPEN UNIVERSITY, MILTON KEYNES KEY NOTE SPEAKER: PROFESSOR JAMES NAZROO (MANCHESTER) CHAIR: PROFESSOR RICHARD JENKINS (SHEFFIELD) This one day interdisciplinary conference seeks to re-ignite debates about the lived consequences of the category of Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) in statutory services. Using mental health (MH) and Learning Disability (LD) as reference points the conference will explore fresh understandings and theorisations for how BME plays out within the care/control function of the state. Conference organisers acknowledge that ‘Learning Disability’ is contested by advocacy groups; however it is employed here to reflect its use in statutory services. The conference is hosted by the Faculty of Health and Social Care (The Open University) and the Race and Ethnicity Study Group (British Sociological Association). Background Notwithstanding recent advancements, there remains a disjuncture between theory and praxis in the sociology literature on ethnicity. While it is now accepted that ethnicity is an ontologically unstable category (Alexander 2006), writers arguably over-emphasise ethnicity qua ethnicity at the expense of material and psychic consequences of ethnic categorisations (Carter and Fenton, 2011). However there is long-standing evidence that the category BME has consequences for lived experience in statutory services where the state’s care/control function is thrown into sharp focus. Consequently although less likely to receive welfare services, BMEs are over-represented in the coercive aspects of ‘caring’ services. In MH and LD for instance, some BME groups are less likely to access preventative services but more likely to be detained for involuntary treatment (Mir et al, 2001; Care Quality Commission and National Mental Health Development Unit, 2011). Thus ‘[p]aradoxically, they receive the MH services they don’t want, but not the ones they do or might want’ (Keating and Robertson, 2004, p446). While the applied literature has helpfully evidenced these inequalities, it struggles to satisfactorily operationalise ethnicity to reflect current substantive understandings of fluidity (Nazroo, 2011; Salway et al 2009, 2011). The present age of austerity is likely to exacerbate longstanding inequalities, hence the timely need to refocus on the sociological processes which lead to embodiment of social categories such as BME, MH, and LD. We welcome papers from postgraduate and early career researchers that address the following themes: • What sociological theories are useful in explaining/could explain the disproportionate representation of BME in MH and LD services? • What are the possibilities, limitations and challenges of using ethnic categorisations to describe and explain inequalities in the provision of statutory services? Is an integrative (or intersectional) approach more useful? • Interrogating the category of BME: Although widely used in applied studies, BME is rarely explored critically. What is the history of the category; whose interests does it serve? • Spaces of care/control: ‘Space’ could be geographical, virtual, material, and mental – how is care/control operationalised; what are the mechanisms? • How can the gap between theory and practice be reduced? Is it an issue of dissemination? If so, how can this be bridged? Deadline for abstract submission: 1 MAY 2012 BSA members and non-members, please contact Godfred Boahen at [log in to unmask] to reserve a place at the conference References Alexander, C. (2006). Introduction: Mapping the issues. Ethnic and Racial Studies (Special Issue 'Writing Race: Ethnography and Difference'), 29(3), 397-410. Care Quality Commission and National Mental Health Development Unit. (2011). Count me in 2010. Care Quality Commission and National Mental Health Development Unit. http://www.cqc.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/documents/count_me_in_2010_final_tagged.pdf: Carter, B., & Fenton, S. (2010). Not thinking ethnicity: A critique of the ethnicity paradigm in an over-ethnicised sociology. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 40(1), 1-18. Keating, F., & Robertson, D. (2004). Fear, black people and mental illness: A vicious circle? Health & Social Care in the Community, 12(5), 439-447. Mir, G., Nocon, A., & Ahmad, Waqar and Jones, Lesley. (2001). Learning difficulties and ethnicity. London: Department of Health. Nazroo, J. The utility of ethnic categories: What questions are we trying to answer and who are we trying to kid? Researching Ethnicity: What, Why and how? Manchester Conference Centre. 11 March 2011 Salway, S., Allmark, P., Barley, R., Higginbottom, G., Gerrish, K., & and Ellison, G. (2009). Researching ethnic inequalities'. Social Research Update, 58 Salway, S., Barley, R., Allmark, P., Gerrish, K., Higgingbottom, G., & Ellison, G. (March 2011). Ethnic diversity and inequality: Ethical and scientific rigour in social research. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation. ________________End of message________________ This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for Disability Studies at the University of Leeds (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies). Enquiries about list administration should be sent to [log in to unmask] Archives and tools are located at: www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html You can VIEW, POST, JOIN and LEAVE the list by logging in to this web page.