Samenleving & Politiek, Jaargang 26, 2019, nr. 10 (december), pagina 49 tot 53
Globale solidariteit hoeft niet per se in tegenspraak te zijn met de bestaande systemen van sociale bescherming uitgebouwd op het niveau van de natiestaat. Beiden kunnen, en moeten, elkaar aanvullen.
In the Lancet, Rochelle Ann Burgess et al formulate a call to action to promote social interventions in global mental health. This fits the agenda of Culture4change like a glove. With the authority of the Lancet, it is now recognised that there is an " urgent need to develop more comprehensive psychosocial prevention, promotion, and treatment interventions capable of addressing the everyday impacts of social, economic, and political forces on individuals’ mental health, through expansion of the “social” aspect of our global mental health efforts". Hurray! This is what we are trying to do. Time for us to write up - a challenge in itself when the actual work to make a change in real life is already taking up so much time...
Great initiative of Dutch Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation Sigrid Kaag, to organize a conference with the motto “mind the mind now” on Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in Crisis Situations. In Amsterdam on 7 & 8 October 2019, Minister Kaag aims to bring home the message that “Mental Health and Psychosocial Support is a necessity in any humanitarian response”. In a tweet on 25 September she states that “Psychosocial support needs to become a standard component of humanitarian aid”. At C4C we applaud Minister Kaag for this initiative…
...even though psychosocial care is of course not a new thing, as the humdrum around the minister’s initiative seems to claim. It has been around for more than 30 years, started to be recognized in the early 1990s, was included in the ‘cluster approach’ of the humanitarian response introduced in 2005, and guidelines on “Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in Emergency Settings” were accepted widely as from 2007.
But in all that time, not much has really improved in how to provide effective psychosocial care.
Images of children playing games or women talking in groups are still dominant when it comes to picturing psychosocial care. However, a recent systematic review of focused psychosocial interventions found, once again, that these type of interventions may be moderately effective in reducing PTSD symptoms and functional impairment in children, but are mostly helpful in increasing hope, coping, and social support. That is an echo of an important study from 2007, which stated that community efficacy, social connectedness, and hope are the most important elements of psychosocial programming.
In other words, what is effective in psychosocial care points at an approach that puts the mobilization of communities' beliefs and hopes central. The irony is that this does not require mental health professionals! But rather another species, often lacking in the relief world – a kind of social workers who know how to apply existing, often cultural values and resources in order to rebuild and stimulate community efficacy. We try to do this at C4C, and we look forward to find more initiatives like this at the conference. We will keep you posted!
Willem van de Put (C4C) is on the panel in the discussion on: Mental health: only me? or also us?
Alternatives to the individualistic bias of the mindfulness industry
25 September 2019, 19:30 - 21:00, Expo Zaal, Eijffel Gebouw, free entrance, language: english
As part of the International Mental Health Festival, Debatcentrum Sphinx will organize a debate which will take a critical stance towards the individualistic framing of mental health issues: as personal failures, as the incapacity to cope with pressures from work, studies, social media. And around which an industry of mental health therapies and coachings has emerged, all with their own philosophy to teaches individuals to cope and become more resilient.
No matter the importance of taking mental breakdowns very seriously and of finding ways to get back on one’s legs, this framing of mental health issues as individual is not neutral, not innocent, not the only one possible. It tends to render invisible that many of the pressures that make people crash are far from only individual. What is more, it tends to keep us away from developing collaborations and solidarities that might also help prevent breakdown or provide effective coping strategies.
In this debate we will elaborate the critique and discuss ‘alternative’ framings and solutions, with experts and audience.
Simone van Trier will lead the discussion.