The importance of Transgender Day of Visibility for health psychology

~Gareth Treharne, Department of Psychology, University of Otago, Aotearoa/New Zealand (gtreharne@psy.otago.ac.nz)

Today and evTery March 31st is Transgender Day of Visibility (see TransStudent.org or here). This day is around 6 months away from Transgender Day of Remembrance, which is held on November 20th and memorialises transgender people whose lives have been cut short (http://tdor.info). Both days serve an important purpose in raising awareness of transgender issues. Both days are pertinent to health psychology, but transgender issues continue to have very little visibility in health psychology. This oversight of transgender issues is sometimes backed up with claims that transgender issues only need to be considered when a particular piece of research or a particular health service is specifically directed at transgender people. I argue that those claims should be contested.

Today is about celebrating the visibility of transgender people. As a gay person I feel a synergy with this day of pride in being visible. I also feel a pang of trepidation at sharing that sense of synergy because today isn’t about sexuality. At the same time, I recognise an opportunity to contribute to discussions about transgender visibility from the position of a transgender ally because I know I can submit this blog post and hopefully it will be up on the website before people living in the Americas wake up to Transgender Day of Visibility. For once I can benefit from living in Aotearoa/New Zealand’s timezone where it’s always closer to tomorrow and I usually hear about international days the day after they’ve happened.
Continue reading

Theses with a difference: Taking chances in psychology

Kerry Chamberlain
Helen OE

For some time now I have been banging on about the limitations of the ways that psychologists approach their research uncritically, and lamenting the way that so many psychologists simply take up theoretical ideas and methodological approaches from others, often without providing any substantial argument in support of their choices other than to point at references to published work as a (very weak) attempt at authentication. Doing research this way serves to limit ownership of the research, restrict reflexivity, and constrain creativity around what might be done.

So it’s time to celebrate some of those people I have been fortunate enough to work with – Joanna, Dany, Helen, and Megan – who have been brave enough to go their own way, take chances, position themselves differently, and work creatively in developing and producing their theses.   Continue reading

Is There Space for Vulnerability in Academia?

~Andrea LaMarre (alamarre@uoguelph.ca)

As a graduate student, it can be tempting to hide behind an armoured cloak of protection, pretending that things like rejection – from peer-reviewed journals, from funding sources, from research assistantship positions – never happen. The face we want to show is a resilient one: a cheery, go-getter visage that shows the world (or at least your advisor) that you are eager and willing to put in the time and effort required to complete and excel in your postgraduate program.

12422288_10153510648324639_1647445089_o

Lately there seems to have been a turn toward recognizing the mental health issues that circulate in the academic world. The stress that can accompany hard work in academia or elsewhere manifests in myriad ways, from distress around food and exercise to despair and feeling immobilized and unable to do the work expected of you (and that you expect of yourself). I see this increasing openness as a step toward really addressing the structural issues that can lead to highly intelligent and motivated individuals bowing out of the academic rat race to pursue alternative options – but only if we move beyond an individualizing discourse that makes each of us responsible for pulling up our socks and stiffening our upper lips.

Despite increasing encouragement of openness and honesty about postgraduate mental health concerns, making oneself vulnerable remains the exception, rather than the rule. Our vulnerability is solicited out of one side of the policy mouthpiece, while those who outwardly express their emotions in academic spaces risk being labeled hysterical, somehow deficient, or otherwise not cut out for the rough and tumble world of academia.

The case for vulnerability in academia is a complex one. To truly let emotion into the academic arena, we need to build spaces where emotions are seen as generative of creativity and innovation. Unfortunately, such spaces require re-thinking a number of things that academia holds dear: the publish-or-perish mentality, the expectation of 24-hour availability, and even the rhetoric of “but you’re doing what you love!” In the face of the poor job prospects we’re repeatedly told that we’re facing, why would we want to lose face?

Continue reading

Why write a blog post?

A couple of months ago, I was introduced to Dave Nicholls, Chair of the Critical Physiotherapy Network. The Critical Physiotherapy Network is an organisation which has a lot of synergies with ISCHP, and Dave and I met to discuss how our respective organisations managed membership and communication issues. In the course of our conversation, he commented about blog posts, how they are easy and quick to write, why people should do this more often, and why most people don’t. I took him up on this and asked him to write a post about it for our blog, which he promptly did. Thank you Dave, some very good advice for our members. If this inspires you to write for our blog (and it is meant to), then please write something and send it off to one of our blog editors or commissioning editors – their addresses can be found under the Blog Team menu). Thanks, Kerry Chamberlain.

480599953_f6957e1d4b_o
photo credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/84567688@N00/480599953 License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/

Please answer all questions on this paper.

Question 1.

A blog is:

  1. A personal web page on which an individual records opinions, links to other sites, etc. on a regular basis
  2. A badly written piece of banal drivel, written by someone craving the affirmation of others
  3. A revolutionary mode of postmodern peeragogy, democratizing the sharing and distribution of ideas and opinions
  4. All of the above, and more

It would be nice to think that the correct answer is 1 and 3, but you can’t really avoid badly written blogs if you allow for such a free and easy mode of personal expression.  To me, the fact that some blogs are poorly written doesn’t matter.  All that really matters is that ideas and opinions are being shared.

Continue reading

Psychology and racism

This is a cross post from site editor Glen Jankowski on racism and psychology.

Body image, critical psychology and other stuff

Psychology’s whiteness
So people of colour aren’t really represented in psychology. Psychology tends to be done by  and on White Westerners (see below & Henrich et al., 2010Arnett , 2008).

Henrich image.png

This follows a general trend in academia where the majority of research is published West (see Pawlik & Rosezweig, 2000).

Publication globally Pawlik & Rosenzweig 2000.pngThree problems with psychology’s Whiteness

1. First, psychology’s White bias has allowed psychology to focus on issues more relevant to White, Westerners. So for example, one group of psychologists, body image researchers, will criticize the fashion industry for its too-thin models but not that the models are nearly always White  or that the clothes the models are selling are made by people of colour in sweatshops.

2. Second, Psychology has sought to subdue Black people’s rational responses to racism as irrational. Drapetomania is the classic example, a mental disorder that Black slaves were proposed to have should they try…

View original post 800 more words

Psychologists Against Austerity – call for Everyday Austerity stories

We’re in the middle of a week of action against austerity led by Psychologists Against Austerity (PAA), are a group of psychologists that campaign against the UK government’s cuts to welfare and charity funding. PAA members use their knowledge on the evidence of the impact of austerity (see this recent review of austerity’s impact) as well as – for PAA clinicians – their knowledge of those with mental health problems – to demonstrate the increasing harm austerity is having on the UK population.

screen-shot-2015-09-18-at-16-15-15

In their report on their work and the impact of austerity they state for instance:

Austerity policies have damaging psychological costs. Mental health problems are being created in the present, and further problems are being stored for the future. We have identified five ‘Austerity Ailments’. These are specific ways in which austerity policies impact on mental health:
1. Humiliation and shame
2. Fear and distrust
3. Instability and insecurity
4. Isolation and loneliness
5. Being trapped and powerless

These experiences have been shown to increase mental health problems. Prolonged humiliation following a severe loss trebles the chance of being diagnosed with clinical depression. Job insecurity is as damaging for mental health as unemployment. Feeling trapped over the long term nearly trebles the chances of being diagnosed with anxiety and depression. Low levels of trust increase the chance of being diagnosed with depression by nearly 50 per cent.

Part of their campaign invites stories of ‘everyday austerity’:

We would like to hear your stories about how the cuts have affected you and your service. We want the wider public and politicians to understand the real life costs of public sector cuts. It can be hard to speak up alone, so we are collating everyone’s stories – together we have more power and a louder voice. We all have stories of frustration, fear and anger, so please use this as a way to tell the world about how the cuts have impacted on you and/or the people you work with. We are interested in stories from everyone who works in, uses, or needs Psychology services.

We may use these stories in other contexts, such as publication and media.

A lot of the contributions are from clinicians and service users, and whilst these accounts are important, PAA recognize austerity affects everyone.

There is also a need to showcase the disproportionate impact of austerity on those affected by other injustices such as the disabled, people of colour and women. As critical psychologists we may be particularly able to do this, so please contribute a story if you have one. Other ways to support PAA can be found here.

What does ‘critical’ mean?

Charlotte Paddison reflects on what it means to be ‘critical’ in the context of health psychology.  Is this about being dismissive?  About being negative?  No, not at all!

Lecturing is great.  And not least of all because you get all sorts of interesting questions from students.   Recently, I was asked what does being ‘critical’ mean?

Being ‘critical’ can mean different things to different people, in different contexts.  The Oxford dictionary describes it as “expressing adverse or disapproving comments or judgements” and “involving an analysis of the merits and faults of a work.”  Neither of these quite fit the bill for describing critical perspectives in the context of health psychology.

In the course I teach on (Critical issues in Health Psychology), we talked about:

  • Reflexivity

Being willing to question our own value stance as researchers and practitioners, and to question the values and assumptions that underpin health psychology as a discipline

  • Inclusiveness

Value-driven approach that specifically seeks to act to improve health for those who are most disadvantaged

  • Asking questions of methods

This includes questions about choice and appropriateness of methods, and the assumptions about research and knowledge generation that unpin these choices

  • Who benefits?

Asking whose interests are being met by the research, who benefits, and conversely, which groups in society are ignored or overlooked

We also discussed the value of examining social and political aspects of health and health care, the analysis of power, and the value of researchers as ‘agents of social change’.

This description is, of course, both subjective and incomplete.  But maybe it is a helpful starting point?  Perhaps others will have ideas to add here, sharing their views of what constitutes ‘critical’ in health psychology – it would be great to share these!

Interested to learn more? 

Here are some useful resources:

  • Lyons, A.C., Chamberlain, K., (2006). Locating the field: Introducing health psychology. In Lyons, A.C., and Chamberlain, K., (Eds) Health Psychology: A critical introduction.  Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Rohleder, P. (2012). Introduction: critical issues in clinical and health psychology.  In Rohleder, P. Critical issues in clinical and health psychology.  Sage: London.
  • Marks, D. F. (2002). Freedom, responsibility, and power: contrasting approaches to health psychology (editorial essay).  Journal of Health Psychology 7, 5 – 19.
  • Fox, D., Prilleltensky, I., & Austin, S. (Eds.) (2009). Critical psychology: An introduction (2nd edition).  London: Sage.

The regulation of the Black body – Marvina Newton’s Keynote at Gendered Bodies in Visible Spaces day

Marvina NewtonMarvina Newton is a Leeds-based activist who founded the charity Angels of Youth and is a board member of Nigerian Community Leeds. Her work focuses on helping diasdvantaged kids through community and participatory projects spanning justice issues such as climate change, racism, mental health issues and sexism. She gave a keynote at the Gendered Bodies in Visbile Spaces at Leeds Beckett University in June 2015 (see poster below). Her talk concerned the way in which Black women’s bodies are regulated including through skin bleaching and hair relaxing.

Continue reading