Resistance to the biomedicalization of mental illness through peer support: The case of peer specialists and mental health

Certified peer specialists (CPS) are mental health professionals who draw their expertise from lived experience with mental illness and mental distress. They tale a nonmedical, nonclinical approach to providing support to community members with mental health difficulties and in doing so, emphasize the role of social environmental factors that contribute to mental distress. Their perspectives are contrary to the biomedical perspective of mainstream psychiatry. While there is a significant body of literature on CPS, there is a dearth of research on how CPS engage in and perceive the broader mental health system. They resist the biomedicalization of mental illness by moving past labels and the language of pathology to facilitate recovery from mental illness and to resist stigma. Drawing from in-depth interviews with peer specialists, participant observation of a peer-run organization, and a survey of peer specialists across the United States, I ask the following research questions: How and why are CPS challenging the medical model of mental illness? How do CPS consider social environmental factors in the etiology of distress and what are the potential implications for resistance to both biomedicalization and stigmatization? My data suggest that CPS, in their critiques of the medical model and the mental health system, are actively resisting the biomedicalization of mental illness and focus on social environmental factors that contribute to experiences of distress. This research has meaningful implications for research on CPS and hope for recovery from mental illness.