1,721,097 research outputs found
Daydream Archive
Full text linkFelicity Callard’s interest in the long history of research into daydreaming, fantasy and reverie, and the ways in which this subterranean tradition might productively complicate contemporary cognitive scientific investigations of mind wandering, has been a significant focus of her work for Hubbub. In this chapter, she conjures up an imaginary archive of the daydream, as yet dispersed across disciplinary fields and points in time and space, alludes to some of its heterogeneous contents, and asks what the power of such an archive-to-come might be
Introduction
Full text linkIn this introduction, editors Felicity Callard, Kimberley Staines and James Wilkes describe the problem of rest – a ubiquitous concept whose presence or absence affects people, in different ways, everywhere. Depending on whether one is working clinically, historically, artistically, scientifically or through political and economic analysis, ‘rest’ has many looks and feels. The complexities of investigating such a phenomenon gave rise to Hubbub, the project out of which this edited book emerged. The editors describe how the book draws on research and practice undertaken during Hubbub’s two-year residency in The Hub at Wellcome Collection. They outline the book’s organizing structure, which groups the work of social scientists, scientists, humanities scholars, artists and broadcasters by scale of investigation, into minds, bodies and practices
This Is an Experiment: Capturing the Everyday Dynamics of Collaboration in The Diary Room
Full text linkIn this chapter, Felicity Callard, Des Fitzgerald and Kimberley Staines invite the reader to join an experiment they designed specially for The Hub at Wellcome Collection and ran there for a number of months. ‘In the Diary Room’ provides a space and setting for collaborators to reflect on how they think and feel about interdisciplinary collaboration. The reader is encouraged to join an experiment that gathers together an archive tracking the rhythms, energies, detritus and restlessness of interdisciplinary labour
Listening to Long COVID: Epistemic Injustice and COVID-19 morbidity
No full textIn Long Covid, symptoms do not resolve within several weeks after acute infection with SARS-CoV-2. Patients with COVID-19 and long COVID face stigma and discrimination. One important type of discrimination is epistemic injustice which includes testimonial and hermeneutical injustices. Testimonial injustices occur when healthcare professional disregard or discount patients’ symptoms. This worsens healthcare outcomes and exacerbates challenges to adequate healthcare access at the individual level. Furthermore, testimonial injustices may lead to hermeneutical injustices – systemic underrepresentation of the experiences of the marginalized and minoritized. Healthcare professionals play an essential role in mitigating injustices and have a duty to reduce harms done to patients with long COVID. It is crucial that the clinician avoid multiplying associated harms by not engaging in epistemic injustices.We suggest the disability model as an approach to improve clinicians’ response to long covid. Epistemic injustice leads to systemic inequities that affect those with chronic disease in general, particularly in populations suffering from structural inequities. The COVID-19 pandemic provides an opportunity for solidarity with those suffering from other chronic diseases that have been marginalized and stigmatized
Why the Patient-Made Term 'Long Covid' is needed
Full text linkThe patient-made term ‘Long Covid’ is, we argue, a helpful and capacious term that is needed to address key medical, epidemiological and socio-political challenges posed by diverse symptoms persisting beyond four weeks after symptom onset suggestive of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). An international movement of patients (which includes all six authors) brought the persistence and heterogeneity of long-term symptoms to widespread visibility. The same grassroots movement introduced the term ‘Long Covid’ (and the cognate term ‘long-haulers’) to intervene in relation to widespread assumptions about disease severity and duration. Persistent symptoms following severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection are now one of the most pressing clinical and public health phenomena to address: their cause(s) is/are unknown, their effects can be debilitating, and the percentage of patients affected is unclear, though likely significant. The term ‘Long Covid’ is now used in scientific literature, the media, and in interactions with the WHO. Uncertainty regarding its value and meaning, however, remains. In this Open Letter, we explain the advantages of the term ‘Long Covid’ and bring clarity to some pressing issues of use and definition. We also point to the importance of centring patient experience and expertise in relation to ‘Long Covid’ research, as well as the provision of care and rehabilitation.</ns4:p
Between legislation and bioethics: the European Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine
No full textThe chapter explores the role that regional legislation plays in framing human rights and ethical principles in psychiatry by considering the Council of Europe’s Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine. The chapter identifies the Convention’s contribution to an emergent legislative, regulatory and discursive formation, which is characterized by its alloy of human rights and bioethics. The author draws attention to articles within the Convention that have implications for psychiatry as regards its engagement with patients, with those on whom it depends to conduct research, and with the public. As well as indicating how various States within the Council of Europe have responded to the Convention, the author considers how the Convention attempts to align human rights and ethics through the regulation and formalisation of the relationship between doctor and patient, and researcher and research participant. This alignment is taking place at the same time as biomedicine is putting pressure on concepts (such as autonomy and informed consent) central to bioethics and human rights discourse
Psychiatric diagnosis: the indispensability of ambivalence
Full text linkThe author analyses how debate over the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders has tended to privilege certain conceptions of psychiatric diagnosis over others, as well as to polarise positions regarding psychiatric diagnosis. The article aims to muddy the black and white tenor of many discussions regarding psychiatric diagnosis by moving away from the preoccupation with diagnosis as classification and refocusing attention on diagnosis as a temporally and spatially complex, as well as highly mediated process. The article draws on historical, sociological and first-person perspectives regarding psychiatric diagnosis in order to emphasise the conceptual—and potentially ethical—benefits of ambivalence vis-à-vis the achievements and problems of psychiatric diagnosis
- …
