INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES ON A COLLECTIVE APPROACH TO RECOVERY AND CITIZENSHIP
Palavras-chave:Cidadania, Coletivo, Comunidade, Saúde Mental, Intercâmbio Cultural
In recent years, the citizenship framework has been refined and expanded by mental health practitioners from around the world who have applied it to their cultural and sociopolitical contexts. One driving factor in the process has been in-person cultural exchanges to observe how citizenship theory is operationalized in practice. Since 2015, Focus Act Connect Every-day (FACE) has welcomed visitors from South America, Asia and Europe to participate in its group meetings and community-building activities in New Haven, Connecticut, USA. FACE is a collective of people in recovery, mental health practitioners, and other community members that operates outside of the mental health service system and provides mutual support to its members and participates in community-building work in local neighborhoods. Using reflections on their experiences with FACE, the authors discuss how FACE and its unique application of the citizenship framework might pertain to their own contexts. Further, the authors consider the potential for promoting civic engagement and building community power that implementing projects similar to FACE might have, particularly among marginalized groups.
ANTHONY, W.A. (1993). Recovery from mental illness: The guiding vision of the mental health Service system in the 1990s. Psychosocial Rehabilitation Journal, 16(4), 11–23.
BALLANTYNE, E. et al (2020). Mad people's history and identity: A Mad Studies critical pedagogy project. In E. Scandrett (Ed.), Public sociology as educational practice: challenges, dialogues and counterpublics. Bristol, UK: Bristol University Press.
BERESFORD, P. (2014). Mad Studies is an idea that is new in the UK but offers fresh hope of improving the lives of people experiencing distress, argues Professor Peter Beresford. Mental Health Today. November 2014. Retrievable from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272190499
CAPS INDEPENDENT ADVOCACY (2010). Oor Mad History: A Community History of the Lothian Mental Health Service User Movement. Living Memory Association. Edinburgh.
COGAN, N.A., et al (2020). “The biggest barrier is to inclusion itself”: The experience of citizenship for adults with mental health problems, Journal of Mental Health, DOI: 10.1080/09638237.2020.1803491
COSTA, L. (2013). Mad Studies: What is it and why you should care. Mad Studies Network, online resource. Retrievable from: https://madstudies2014.wordpress.com/2014/10/15/mad-studies-what-it-is-and-why-you-should-care-2/
COX, L. (2018). Why social movements matter: An introduction. London & New York: Rowman and Littlefield International.
DAVIDSON, L., et al (2005). Recovery in Serious Mental Illness: A New Wine or Just a New Bottle? Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 36(5), 480–487. DOI: 10.1037/0735-7028.36.5.480
DAVIDSON, L. & STRAUSS, J.S. (1992). Sense of self in recovery from severe mental illness. British Journal of Medical Psychology, 65, 131-145
DEEGAN, P. E. (1988). Recovery: The lived experience of rehabilitation. Psychosocial Rehabilitation Journal, 11(4), 11–19.
HALL, B. (2006). Social movement learning: Theorizing a Canadian tradition. Contexts of adult education: Canadian perspectives, 230-238. Toronto: Thomson Educational Publishing.
KILGORE, D. W. (1999). Understanding learning in social movements: A theory of collective learning. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 18(3), 191-202. DOI: 10.1080/026013799293784
ONOCKO-CAMPOS, et al. (2017). Recovery, citizenship, and psychosocial rehabilitation: A dialog between Brazilian and American mental health care approaches. American Journal of Psychiatric Rehabilitation, 20(3), 311-326. DOI: 10.1080/15487768.2017.1338071
PONCE, A. N et al. (2016). Social and clinical dimensions of citizenship from the mental health-care provider perspective. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 39(2), 161–166. https://doi.org/10.1037/prj0000194
QUINN N., BROMAGE B, ROWE M. (2019). Collective citizenship: From citizenship and mental
health to citizenship and solidarity. Social Policy & Administration, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12551
RAFFERTY, J.A. et al (2015). Discrimination. In M.T. Compton & R.S. Shim (Ed.), The social determinants of mental health (pp. 23-45). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.
RICCI, É.C., et al (2020). Narratives about the experience of mental illness: The recovery process in Brazil. Psychiatric Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11126-020-09824-4
ROWE, M. (2015). Citizenship and mental health. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
ROWE, M. & DAVIDSON, L. (2016). Recovering citizenship. Israel Journal of Psychiatry and Related Sciences, 53(1), 14-20.
TOPOR, A., et al (2011). Not just an individual journey: Social aspects of recovery. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 57(1): 90–99. DOI: 10.1177/0020764010345062
Copyright (c) 2021 Cadernos Brasileiros de Saúde Mental/Brazilian Journal of Mental Health
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
A publicação é de Acesso Aberto (Open Access) e enquadrada em um modelo de licença Creative Commons – atribuição CC BY (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Esta licença permite que outros distribuam, remixem, adaptem e criem a partir do trabalho, mesmo para fins comerciais, desde que atribuam o devido crédito pela criação original.