You might also find the approach of Liberation Psychology of interest. Martìn-Baró and others specifically developed an alternative to traditional Northern individualism in psychology.
See http://libpsy.org

Mark

On 01/06/17 16:28, Cromby, John J. (Dr.) wrote:

Hi

I’m one of the people who worked relatively closely with David Smail in the last years of his life, so I’d like to respond to recent posts generated by Andrew Brown’s questions.

Andrew, many thanks for opening up this discussion and I’m pleased you found something of value in David’s work.

As others have observed, David’s sceptical stance toward the claimed successes of individual therapy was controversial and his emphasis on power and its effects not always approved of by today’s clinical managers. Nevertheless, there are ways of using at least some of his ideas in clinical work and should you eventually be so inclined to train in this way (I appreciate this does not seem to be your current intention) then the UEL course would indeed be great, as would perhaps the course in Leicester. I think you’re right, too, to say that there are connections between social work perspectives on mental health and David’s approach: certainly I supply a regular guest lecture on mental health to a social training course where I draw on David’s ideas (amongst others) and they seem to fit in well.

I’m afraid I don’t know of any other more informal courses you could take and suspect that should you seek tuition in (say) sociology instead of psychology you would largely find the same issue there as in most of psychology, only inverted. So whereas psychology does not properly conceptualise and include the social, sociology does not properly conceptualise and include individual experience (with occasional exceptions e.g. Ian Burkitt’s work).

David Fryer correctly observes that David Smail’s work is not beyond critique or improvement, and indeed I and the other members of the Midlands Psychology Group continue to develop David Smail’s ideas. But, of course, the ideas that David Fryer suggests as alternatives are not without shortcomings of their own. Deleuzean perspectives, for example (which are currently very fashionable) have been subjected to detailed and telling critiques – in relation to their notion of affect (e.g by Ruth Leys) and in more general philosophical and political terms (e.g. by Peter Hallward).

It’s also worth mentioning that David Smail’s work was influenced by Foucault as well as by Marx. Much ink has been expended trying to resolve the differences and clarify the connections between Marxian and Foucauldian positions and this is not the place to rehash those debates. In many respects they are aspects of a broader debate about the political and practical applicability of what are loosely termed poststructuralist approaches. David Smail was certainly not entirely hostile to these approaches, but he did have a healthy scepticism toward some of the claims associated with them – and he did reject the strong influence given to language in many versions of these theories, (at least as they entered psychology).

It can be tempting to think of theory as ‘pure’, and the work of social workers and clinical psychologists by contrast as hopelessly compromised. We might imagine that the theorists are simply pursuing truth and goodness, whereas the clinicians and social workers are unwitting ‘soft cops’, policing and regulating the poor and disadvantaged, and largely blind to the ways that their own interests are at stake in this.

Tempting though this picture is, David Smail recognised that it is false. I imagine David would have said that the work of theorists is no less driven by interests than the work of clinicians and social workers. After all, both groups depend on their work to put money in their pockets and a roof over their heads. In his book ‘Power, Interest and Psychology’, David showed how the theories that Freud developed were both shaped by, and reflective of, his own interests as a would-be therapist.

This doesn’t mean that theory is useless, a waste of time, hopelessly compromised. Theory is essential if we are to overcome the mystifications of the powerful. But it does perhaps mean that, rather than strive for some (in case mythical) theoretical purity, we should never lose sight of Marx’s dictum that, ultimately, ‘the point is to change it’

So my advice Andew is that- as David F - suggests you visit David Smail’s website, and perhaps also the website of the MPG at: http://www.midpsy.org/.  In effect, teach yourself!

In doing this, if you have specific questions about anything you read you can address them to MPG (email address on the site) and one of us will try to respond.

I hope this helps.

J.

---

From: The UK Community Psychology Discussion List <[log in to unmask] UK> on behalf of David Fryer <000009568ba4bd41-dmarc- [log in to unmask]>
Sent: 01 June 2017 09:33:51
To: [log in to unmask] UK
Subject: Re: 3 questions about environmentalist approaches

 

Dear Andrew,

In your email you say you want to be able to learn more about what you call “‘environmentalist’ approaches to mental health” which you describe as “the sort of approach promoted by David Smail”.

There are other members of this list who worked with David and who would be more appropriate than I am to discuss the detail of David’s work. However I would observe though that David’s website ‘Social Power and Psychological Distress: A social materialist approach to clinical psychology” is still accessible at: http://www.davidsmail.info/ introfra.htm. You wrote that you’d prefer to find out more but through a “face-to-face” course rather than through reading books etc. but I would recommend you read some of David’s work which is linked via his website if you have not done so.

I regarded David Smail with great respect, enjoyed working with him when we were both members of the Editorial Board of the Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology and appreciated the chances I had to get into discussion with him. His death was a great loss. However, David’s work is / was not beyond critique and is / was only one approach to contesting the dominant individualism and intra-psychic obsession of clinical psychology, there are others and of course David Smail remained committed to a version of clinical psychology himself.

You ask whether what you are seeking “would be more sociology/anthropology orientated than psychology orientated”. My own view is that the most sophisticated and interesting work which could be characterized as ‘environmentalist’ (at least for those who have a broad inclusive understanding of ‘environment’) is being done by trans-disciplinary scholars (such as economists, historians of science, philosophers, physicians, literary critics, medical anthropologists) catalyzed by the efforts of ‘anthropologists of subjectivity’ who combine critical social theory with innovative engagement with practice. 

If you were willing to read a book despite your reservations you could do far worse than start with Subjectivity: Ethnographic Investigations edited by Joao Biehl, Byron Good and Arthur Kleinman (2007) University of California Press. To quote from the editors on page 1: “This book . . . examines the genealogy of what we consider the modern subject, and it enquires into the continuity and diversity of personhood across greatly diverse societies, including the ways in which inner processes are reshaped amid economic and political reforms, violence and social suffering.” ‘Environmentalist approaches to mental health’ – whilst not referred to as such -  engage with resubjectification in relation to austerity, ‘free’ trade economics, -globalization, neoliberalism, psycho-pharmacologicalisation, terrorism, war (with and without bullets) etc.

This approach to environment and mental health is radically different to David Smail’s. The reference to genealogy flags up intellectual indebtedness to Foucault (and Deleuze) rather than Marx (especially in relation to assumptions about power). The notion of individual-in-context is abandoned in favour of the socially re-constituted subject. The distal / proximal binary is abandoned in favour of the immanent etc.  

Whilst nothing is certain, this approach at least holds up the prospect of engaging critically with subjectivity, social power and the machinery of knowledge claim legitimation without re-inscribing the psy-complex, or at least not as we know it.  It certainly precludes “training to become a mental health social worker/nurse/psychologist/ psychotherapist or other MH professional” which you want to avoid.

David

---

From: Andrew Brown <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] UK
Sent: Wednesday, 31 May 2017, 1:29
Subject: 3 questions about environmentalist approaches

Dear All,

 

My name is Andrew and I’m not a practicing community psychologist but I hope that some of you on this list may be able to help me.

 

I would like to ask about ‘environmentalist’ approaches to mental health. I mean the sort of approach promoted by David Smail who believed that mental distress is caused by the environment that we inhabit in the present (as well as that which we inhabited in the past); that the only way of finding relief from distress, as an individual, is to attempt to alter our environment by making real changes to our lives (getting a new job, joining clubs, making friends, living somewhere different etc); and that the only way of addressing the root causes of distress, is to use politics to change society at large. Importantly, it seems he believed that relief is not found by willfully changing the way we think about ourselves and the world. And that the role of psychology and and psychotherapy, for the individual, is limited to providing comfort, clarification and encouragement (in making the sorts of changes described above).

I would be really grateful if you could help answer these questions which have been bothering me:

1. Can any list members recommend a course of study that explores the above approach to mental distress?

• I'm curious about where I might be able to learn more about these ideas without training to become a mental health social worker/nurse/psychologist/ psychotherapist or other MH professional. I'm thinking more along the lines of a face-to-face course, rather than books or other resources. I wonder whether such training would be more sociology/anthropology orientated than psychology orientated.

2. Is there anyone out there who practices primarily using an environmentalist approach? 

3. Is there a difference between the approach advanced by David Smail and 'systemic' social work theory? My girlfriend is training to be a MH social worker and it seems to me that the theories she talks about are very similar to an environmentalist psychology approach.

I look forward to hearing from you

Thanks a lot,

Andrew

 

 

______________________________ _____ The list is jointly managed by David Fryer [log in to unmask] and Grant Jeffrey [log in to unmask], either of whom are able to deal with queries. To unsubscribe or to change your details on this COMMUNITYPSYCHUK list, visit the website: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi- bin/webadmin?A0= COMMUNITYPSYCHUK

______________________________ _____ The list is jointly managed by David Fryer [log in to unmask] and Grant Jeffrey [log in to unmask], either of whom are able to deal with queries. To unsubscribe or to change your details on this COMMUNITYPSYCHUK list, visit the website: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi- bin/webadmin?A0= COMMUNITYPSYCHUK

______________________________ _____ The list is jointly managed by David Fryer [log in to unmask] and Grant Jeffrey [log in to unmask], either of whom are able to deal with queries. To unsubscribe or to change your details on this COMMUNITYPSYCHUK list, visit the website: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi- bin/webadmin?A0= COMMUNITYPSYCHUK

--

From: Mark Burton Scholar-Activist. 37 Chandos Rd South Chorlton Manchester M21 0TH; UK  Telephones: +44 (0)161 881 6887 landline +44 (0)777 594 9479 mobile

http://steadystatemanchester. net Steady State Manchester http://uncommontater.net personal blog including information on my publications. Why is this email yellow? Some people find it easier to read text against a coloured background - often yellow works best.

______________________________ _____ The list is jointly managed by David Fryer [log in to unmask] and Grant Jeffrey [log in to unmask], either of whom are able to deal with queries. To unsubscribe or to change your details on this COMMUNITYPSYCHUK list, visit the website: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi- bin/webadmin?A0= COMMUNITYPSYCHUK