To: <s-acc@yahoogroups.com>
Cc: Friends
From: "Andrew Phelps" <starfish@northcoast.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 2010 23:28:51 -0800
Subject: [s-acc] medical model
Hi
Ttt wrote:
The term "medical model" has nothing to do with the use of meds vs. therapy per se. The medical model is where you list every possible cause for a person's pain and then start eliminating those that are definitely not applicable, then the "probably nots" until you get to one or two that fit the best.
However 'medical model' is used in the "client/survivor" movement in the capacity of "meds vs. therapy." Going deeper than that has commonly been regarded as an impediment to action.
The fallacy is that in a medical situation there is usually a way to test whereas with human behavior, it is strictly the opinion of the person evaluating based on their visual perception and what the patient has told him/her.
This is still a narrow way of putting it. I distinguish a "micro" approach such as that and a "macro" approach which looks towards what a genuine science of 'madness' would say and do.
Your Dr. Gelles put it "micro," based on the actual practice from the subjective point of view of the people doing it. Tom Scheff adds the (prescientific) sociology which enables him to describe things as "labeling theory" and then the issues if
one doesn't do labeling come to him as "residual rule-breaking." Kmo – another sociologist (as he says, not a scientist) empowers the self-expression of the "residual rule-breaking" by creating Zen roles (my term).Another U.N.H. person after Gelles has helped put this in "macro," John Shotter. He worked out the theory which is called "social accountability" (for which this list is named).
The "micro" point of view applies the "social role" implications of the 'clinical gaze' by picking apart the details. The "macro" point of view starts from the relational responsibilities stemming from those social roles. Those things are complementary. My own personal strength is more on the "macro" side, rather in line with British critical psychology. I
wrote about that on the website which is mentioned at the bottom of every S-ACC post. [It's old and has some bad links, but it's still good.]When you address the propensity of staff to use a different "privileged" rest room, that's concrete, and micro. I think you and Kmo will do great on that. I'd suggest you see if you can bring Tom Scheff in also. (Santa Barbara is not that far from Anaheim.) If you do that right, you will be able to challenge the mental habits of the "client/survivors" who advocate to exclusion the "meds vs. therapy" approach.
Meanwhile I'll engage the behavioral philosophies of George Herbert Mead, Lev Vygotsky, Mikhail Bakhtin, and Giambattista Vico.
Andrew Phelps
http://batstar.net/piper