IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v62y2006i3p552-563.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The field of psychiatric contention in the UK, 1960-2000

Author

Listed:
  • Crossley, Nick

Abstract

In this paper I discuss the question of how we should understand the concept of "social movements", particularly as applied to health related movements. My argument is that movements should be understood as "fields of contention". This concept, as I develop it, emphasizes two key aspects of social movement mobilization. Firstly, departing from traditional models of movements, which tend to view them as unified "things", it draws our attention to the numerous groups and agents who interact within the internal space of a "movement" and to the relations, alliances and conflicts between those various groups/agents as they unfold through time. Secondly, it draws our attention to the embedding of social movement struggles within multiple differentiated contexts of struggle, each of which affords different opportunities for struggle but each of which makes different demands upon activists if struggle is to prove effective. The model of fields of contention is explored within the paper using empirical data on a variety of "social movement organizations" (SMOs) which have formed around the mental health system in the UK over the last forty years.

Suggested Citation

  • Crossley, Nick, 2006. "The field of psychiatric contention in the UK, 1960-2000," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 552-563, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:62:y:2006:i:3:p:552-563
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(05)00299-6
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Crossley, Nick, 1998. "R. D. Laing and the British anti-psychiatry movement: a socio-historical analysis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 47(7), pages 877-889, October.
    2. McInerney, Fran, 2000. ""Requested death": a new social movement," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 137-154, January.
    3. Crossley, Michele L. & Crossley, Nick, 2001. "Patient' voices, social movements and the habitus; how psychiatric survivors 'speak out," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 52(10), pages 1477-1489, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Laws, Jennifer, 2009. "Reworking therapeutic landscapes: The spatiality of an 'alternative' self-help group," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 1827-1833, December.
    2. Baggott, Rob & Jones, Kathryn, 2014. "The voluntary sector and health policy: The role of national level health consumer and patients' organisations in the UK," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 202-209.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Young, Jessica E. & Jaye, Chrystal & Egan, Richard & Winters, Janine & Egan, Tony, 2021. "The discursive context of medical aid in dying: A paradox of control?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 291(C).
    2. Karsoho, Hadi & Fishman, Jennifer R. & Wright, David Kenneth & Macdonald, Mary Ellen, 2016. "Suffering and medicalization at the end of life: The case of physician-assisted dying," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 170(C), pages 188-196.
    3. Speed, Ewen, 2006. "Patients, consumers and survivors: A case study of mental health service user discourses," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 28-38, January.
    4. Epstein, Steven, 2016. "The politics of health mobilization in the United States: The promise and pitfalls of “disease constituencies”," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 246-254.
    5. Underman, Kelly, 2015. "Playing doctor: Simulation in medical school as affective practice," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 136, pages 180-188.
    6. Croft, Charlotte & Currie, Graeme & Staniszewska, Sophie, 2016. "Moving from rational to normative ideologies of control over public involvement: A case of continued managerial dominance," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 124-132.
    7. Rabeharisoa, Vololona, 2006. "From representation to mediation: The shaping of collective mobilization on muscular dystrophy in France," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 564-576, February.
    8. Vanderslott, Samantha, 2019. "Exploring the meaning of pro-vaccine activism across two countries," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 59-66.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:62:y:2006:i:3:p:552-563. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.