Diasporic Muslims, Mental Health, and Subjectivity: Perspectives and Experiences of Mental Health Care Professionals in Ghent

Abstract

The mental health of Muslims with a migration background in Belgium seems to be particularly at risk. Inspired by the work of Nikolas Rose on the question of subjectivity, our sociological research analyses processes of subjectification that occur within existing mental health services, and the subsequent "proper" subject of mental health that is created along the way. We focus on how mental health care professionals approach and construct diasporic Muslims in Ghent, a middle-sized city in the north of Belgium. The article consists of three sections. We first lay out how our study is grounded in the work of Rose and his attention to subjectivity. The second section presents our methodology, and the empirical material that grounds our analysis. In the third section, we apply Rose's approach to subjectivity to our empirical data. Our study challenged us to illustrate and discuss different aspects of the subjectivity dimension as explained by Rose, and to enlarge our analytical approach and identify a logic of cultural difference by relying on the work of Edward Said. We come to the conclusion that the work of Rose and Said allows a critical deconstruction of this binary dialectic between ontologically different categories of Self and Other, yet does not enable us to go beyond a negative appreciation of professionals in mental health care and to (re-)imagine a non-deterministic and non-dualistic framing of the human subject formation of diasporic Muslims.

Revisiting Goffman: frames of mental health in the interactions of mental healthcare professionals with diasporic Muslims

“…This took place at a time when policymakers and politicians drew inspiration from the rhetoric of deinstitutionalisation and community care as an alternative to institutionalised healthcare. (Rondelez et al 2017). Although we are aware that the total institutions and institutional discourses in which Goffman developed his research no longer exist as such in the contemporary Western world (Rondelez et al 2017;Bachrach 1995a, b;Pieters and Peuskens 1995;Rissmiller and Rissmiller 2006;Stein 1995;Stockman 2000;Traustado ´ttir and Kristiansen 2004;Vandeurzen 2010), we argue that his work remains relevant as a means of capturing the underlying professional rationales and frames used in micro-social interactions in contemporary mental healthcare services (Pilgrim and Carey 2010).…”

“…(Rondelez et al 2017). Although we are aware that the total institutions and institutional discourses in which Goffman developed his research no longer exist as such in the contemporary Western world (Rondelez et al 2017;Bachrach 1995a, b;Pieters and Peuskens 1995;Rissmiller and Rissmiller 2006;Stein 1995;Stockman 2000;Traustado ´ttir and Kristiansen 2004;Vandeurzen 2010), we argue that his work remains relevant as a means of capturing the underlying professional rationales and frames used in micro-social interactions in contemporary mental healthcare services (Pilgrim and Carey 2010). Applying them to this setting requires a critical treatment of Goffman's conceptualisation of frames, however, in order to refine our understanding of frames and ensure its proper application to our own research.…”

“…We can identify the origins of notions of professional practice in the modern history of psychiatry, which began with the rise of asylums. The function of these institutions was focused on security, protecting the outside world from people with mental health problems, while protecting these individuals from the cruel and dangerous world outside (Barnes et al 1999;Rondelez et al 2017;Stockman 2000;Vandeurzen 2010). The rise of scientific medicine led to new forms of social surveillance and discipline for people with mental health problems (Barnes et al 1999).…”

“…This view emerged from critiques of the institutions, as a symbol of human rights violations. This shift should be considered in a changing vision on citizenship: the aim is to extend welfare provisions and citizenship rights to the entire population (Bachrach 1995a;Rondelez et al 2017;Stein 1995;Traustado ´ttir and Kristiansen 2004).…”