Too Young to Be Mad: Disabling Encounters with 'Normal' from the Perspectives of Psychiatrized Youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, the psychiatrization of children and youth is explored, as well as their representation within Mad and Disability Studies. Presented are the outcomes of a photo voice project conducted with seven (N=7) youths between 14 and 17 years old constructed as having a “serious mental health issue.” The self-identified research question the young people asked and answered was: What is ‘normal mental health’ for children and youth? Through the photographs and explanations of the images, we learn that ‘normal’ is a matter of perspective, an ambiguous and shifting standard against which young people are compared, and from which constructions of ‘mental disorder’ as difference and abnormal are imposed on their experiences of distress. As a mechanism for psychiatrization, the difference becomes the rationale for prejudice and discrimination at the intersections of childhood and adultism, distress and sanism, and (in)competence and ableism. The implications of expanding children’s theorizing and activism for Mad and Disability studies are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".