The politicizing clinic: insights on ‘the social’ for mental health policy and practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: In this paper, we explore how Brazilian socially sensitive therapy can respond to care-users' desire to change the social and political forces shaping their lives. We use this case to demonstrate the limits of the "social determinants of health" agenda which, when operationalized, tends to leave questions of lasting structural change aside. METHODS: We report on mixed methods ethnographic and epidemiological results from the 1982 Pelotas (Brazil) birth cohort study, a prospective study of 5914 children. Ethnographic analysis explored the cyclical relationship between schooling, mental health care, conceptualizations of mental distress, social and political engagement, and experiences with diverse forms of discrimination. Epidemiological bivariate and multivariate analyses examined differences in socio-political participation and the reporting of discrimination at different time-points for participants who used therapy with those who did not. Effect modification analysis tested the hypothesis that the socially empowering effects of therapy were greater for marginalized and minoritized youth. RESULTS: Most young people living in situations of precarity experienced therapy, particularly when based in schools, to be a blame-inducing process. A more fulfilling and impactful therapeutic experience took shape when young people were able to shift the focus away from symptom reduction and behavioral management toward narrative life analyses, social debate, and political agency. Use of socially sensitive therapy was statistically associated with increased political participation and reporting of discrimination after controlling for confounders. The empowering effects of therapy were greater for those with less formal education and family income, but not for young people who identified as black, brown, or non-white. CONCLUSION: The findings underscore the importance of considering agency, sociality, and politics when theorizing "the social" in clinical practice, and health and social policy.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".