Original studyPsychreg Journal of Psychology, 2018Read the paper →
Mental health research often reports which groups are most likely to have a disorder, and services then target those groups. Critics say this can repeat old biases without anyone noticing. A new handbook gathers researchers who question the assumptions behind the Western mental health system.
The book, the Routledge International Handbook of Critical Mental Health, is discussed in an interview with its editor, a sociologist at the University of Auckland. The interview appears in Psychreg Journal of Psychology. It was carried out by the journal’s editor.
The handbook brings together theory and case studies from the UK, the US, Europe, Australia, New Zealand and Canada. It is described as the most comprehensive collection of its kind, aimed at researchers and practitioners in the social and psychological sciences.
Critical mental health is an approach that questions how mental illness is defined, diagnosed and treated, and whose interests these practices serve. Medicalisation describes how everyday problems come to be seen as medical conditions.
In the interview, the editor says he was inspired by frustration at the lack of critical debate at conferences. He describes a talk in which a survey suggested that children of black and single-parent families were more prone to mental illness. The speaker concluded that such families should be targeted, without questioning the measure used or the history of racism in mental health care.
The editor says almost half the contributors are current or former mental health professionals. A similar number work in sociology, social work or related fields, and the rest come from areas such as education, anthropology and philosophy.
The book covers theory, medicalisation, the politics of diagnosis and talking therapy. Chapters recommended in the interview include a history of the growth of autism diagnoses, a study of how psychiatry’s diagnostic manual was produced, a feminist critique of trauma therapy, and an account of how Western psychiatry has spread around the world.
The interview has clear limits. It gives the editor’s own account of his book and does not present new research or opposing views. Many in psychiatry would disagree with parts of the critique.
Debate over how mental illness is defined and treated has grown in recent years. This handbook offers one of the broadest collections of critical work to date, and argues that services should not be exported around the world without question.
