Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The Ontology of Well-Being in Social Policy and Welfare Practice Well-Being, Mental Illness, Co-Production and Social Prescription: Social Constructionism, Relational Integrity, and Agency

The Ontology of Well-Being in Social Policy and Welfare Practice : Well-Being, Mental Illness,... [As with Chap. 6, this chapter starts with sociability as one of the six ontological features of the human condition, identified in Chap. 2, via The Ontology of Well-Being Thesis (TOWT), and defended throughout the book. The argument here maintains an important sociological distinction between the social causation and the social construction of mental health/illness. The socially causation of mental health, focuses on its social epidemiology, so on what kind of social determinants lead to or produce mental health/illness. Whereas the social construction of mental health/illness focuses on how notions of illness, health and care are ‘given meaning’ within and between societies, so on those social determinants that socially define certain people as mentally ill, which, in turn, affects how this group is publicly viewed and treated. Drawing from this sociological distinction, the main claim here is that promoting mental health must accommodate the six ontological features of the human condition identified in Chap. 2, and in TOWT – these features being, in no prioritised order, human embodiment, finiteness, sociability, cognition, evaluation, and agency. Therefore, when exploring the social causation and social construction of mental health/illness, any epistemological and normative implications for people diagnosed as mentally ill must, in some way, reflect these ontological features. For example, the claim here is that a person who is socially constructed as ‘mentally ill’ should also be viewed publicly as someone who can exercise agency, cognition, and evaluation. That is, with these features underpinning a non-determinist epistemological and normative account of mental health/illness and well-being. The further argument is that this account should be central to the co-productive development of mental health policies and practices (notably concerning the practice of social prescription), so opening-up new ways for viewing and treating those people who are socially constructed as ‘mentally ill’.] http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png

The Ontology of Well-Being in Social Policy and Welfare Practice Well-Being, Mental Illness, Co-Production and Social Prescription: Social Constructionism, Relational Integrity, and Agency

Download PDF
24 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/the-ontology-of-well-being-in-social-policy-and-welfare-practice-well-FN67dUHYVt

References (3)

  • N Begum (1996)

    157

  • E Angner (2011)

    4

    International Journal of Well-Being, 1

  • C Ball (2009)

    293

    Public Integrity, 11

Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Copyright
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023
ISBN
978-3-031-18141-2
Pages
171 –195
DOI
10.1007/978-3-031-18142-9_7
Publisher site
See Chapter on Publisher Site

Abstract

[As with Chap. 6, this chapter starts with sociability as one of the six ontological features of the human condition, identified in Chap. 2, via The Ontology of Well-Being Thesis (TOWT), and defended throughout the book. The argument here maintains an important sociological distinction between the social causation and the social construction of mental health/illness. The socially causation of mental health, focuses on its social epidemiology, so on what kind of social determinants lead to or produce mental health/illness. Whereas the social construction of mental health/illness focuses on how notions of illness, health and care are ‘given meaning’ within and between societies, so on those social determinants that socially define certain people as mentally ill, which, in turn, affects how this group is publicly viewed and treated. Drawing from this sociological distinction, the main claim here is that promoting mental health must accommodate the six ontological features of the human condition identified in Chap. 2, and in TOWT – these features being, in no prioritised order, human embodiment, finiteness, sociability, cognition, evaluation, and agency. Therefore, when exploring the social causation and social construction of mental health/illness, any epistemological and normative implications for people diagnosed as mentally ill must, in some way, reflect these ontological features. For example, the claim here is that a person who is socially constructed as ‘mentally ill’ should also be viewed publicly as someone who can exercise agency, cognition, and evaluation. That is, with these features underpinning a non-determinist epistemological and normative account of mental health/illness and well-being. The further argument is that this account should be central to the co-productive development of mental health policies and practices (notably concerning the practice of social prescription), so opening-up new ways for viewing and treating those people who are socially constructed as ‘mentally ill’.]

Published: Nov 12, 2022

There are no references for this article.