Laura Guidry-Grimes, M.A.Georgetown University

Philosophy Doctoral Candidate

DEMANDS FOR RECOGNITION & THE PSYCHIATRIC

USER/SURVIVOR MOVEMENT

NEH Colloquium Hood College 6 March 2014

Outline of Talk

Background on the psychiatric user/survivor (u/s) movement

Demands for recognition: institutional & interpersonal dimensions Nancy Fraser’s status model Peter Strawson’s reactive attitude framework Similarities, dissimilarities with the disability rights

movement (DRM)

Barriers to recognition for u/s Not insurmountable

2

U/S Movement

Began in the 1970s

Inspired by other civil rights groups

Global

Thousands of members

3

4

U/S Groups“allow people’s experiences to become more important

than the diagnoses, validate the person and their

experience, and encourage the person to come up with

their own answers”

Celebrate ”unusual (some call them

‘spectacular’) ways of processing

information and emotion”

U/S Groups

5

“dangerous gifts needing cultivation and care,

rather than diseases or disorders”

“extreme states of consciousness”

U/S

Grou

ps

6

“show that hearing voices is a normal though unusual

variation in human behaviour”

“the problem is not hearing voices but

the inability to cope with the experience”

U/S Movement

Unifying goals Right to self-definition

Increase inclusion of u/s in policy, treatment decisions

Abolish interventions that violate human rights

Eliminate stigmas & social/political/economic barriers

Rethink traditional biomedical modeling allow for flourishing in virtue of psychiatric disability

7

Demands for Recognition

More than the mere acknowledgement of difference Positive accommodations based on their own POV

Respect with restorative potential for marginalized groups

Extension of justice: “should provide mechanisms for the effective

recognition and representation of the distinct voices and perspectives of those […] that are oppressed or disadvantaged” –Iris Marion Young

8

Institutional Recognition

Demand for participatory parity Misrecognition occurs when “institutionalized

patterns of cultural value constitute some actors as inferior, excluded, wholly other or simply invisible, hence as less than full partners in social interaction” – Nancy Fraser

Assert freedoms to self-define, pursue distinctive conception of the good life Requires institutional support

9

Interpersonal Recognition

Demand for others’ respectful stance toward their self-defined interests and needs

Reactive attitudes (RA) as part of relationships, holding each other accountable and in esteem Diminished agency suspend RA

Objective vs. participant vs. mixed attitudes Is the individual entirely incapacitated? Does

he/she not have ordinary interpersonal standing?

Importance of correctly identifying who deserves participant attitude

10

Recognition: DRM

Disability Rights Movement Not being reduced to impairment

Not to be treated as dysfunctional agents

Trust subjective reports of well-being

Opportunities for, uptake of self-definition Diverse modes of being

Greater inclusion

11

Nothing about us without us!

DRM & U/S 12

“voices of disabled people demand recognition, and fair recognition

cannot take the form of hearing but immediately discounting their

position” –Sarah Goering

“no one else, no matter how well trained or qualified, can possibly have had the same experience of the onset of mental

illness, the same initial contact with services, or the same journey through the mental health system” –Lynda Tait & Helen

Lester

Recognition: U/S

Psychiatric User/Survivor MovementGreater inclusion

Trust subjective reports of well-being

Opportunities for, uptake of self-definition Psychiatric diversity

Not to be treated as dysfunctional agents Often deserve participant attitude

Worry about diagnostic label stripping someone of interpersonal standing

13

ALL THEY SEE IS THE DIAGNOSIS

Recognition Barriers for U/S

Agential standing Minimally functional or

autonomous?

Too fragmented?

Epistemic standing Stigma, stereotyping

Lack of clinical insight?

Psychiatric diversity Dubious value

Beneficence trumps

14

Avoid blanket dismissal Spectrum of fragmentation Decision-specific

Combat misperceptions Challenge “poor insight” labels Identify testimonial injustice

Question why it is devalued Raise awareness Critically analyze traditional

accounts of flourishing

Thank You!Questions?

Comments?

Laura Guidry-Grimes

lkg8@georgetown.edu

Presentation avai lable at

www.lauragg.com