Loading…
Self-Management in Psychiatry and Psychomatic Medicine—Part 2
Whereas self-management in somatic medicine is traditionally understood as “disease-management by patients” (Lorig & Holman, 2003), the same model can only be applied to mental health care if we flagrantly fail to acknowledge that problems in self-experience, autonomy, identity, and agency are o...
Saved in:
Published in: | Philosophy, psychiatry & psychology psychiatry & psychology, 2020-12, Vol.27 (4), p.329-332 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Whereas self-management in somatic medicine is traditionally understood as “disease-management by patients” (Lorig & Holman, 2003), the same model can only be applied to mental health care if we flagrantly fail to acknowledge that problems in self-experience, autonomy, identity, and agency are often core aspects of psychiatric and psychosomatic illness. [...]as argued by Van Geelen and Franssen (2017), self-management cannot simply be disease-management by the self. According to her, reflection and attempts to build a coherent self-narrative are unrealistic and overly individualistic means to overcome SIA, and more relational approaches should be considered. Pointing to the fact that borderline personality and addiction are highly stigmatizing affections, she argues that expression of negative affect, even when expressed from a nurturing stance, may have negative consequences for treatment, as opposed to the effect that such responses might have for high functioning autistic people who have difficulty recognizing emotions in others and themselves. [...]the choice for a clinical or a nurturing stance ought to depend on the affliction at issue. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1071-6076 1086-3303 1086-3303 |
DOI: | 10.1353/ppp.2020.0042 |