Comment on Gove's Evaluation of Societal Reaction Theory as an Explanation for Mental Illness

1971 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 313 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Warren Dunham
Keyword(s):  
Mental Illness ◽  
Reaction Theory ◽  
Societal Reaction

scholarly journals Applying Labelling Theory to Selected Short Stories by James T. Farrell

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 143
Author(s):  
Afra S. Alshiban
Keyword(s):  
Short Stories ◽  
Irreversible Process ◽  
Essential Elements ◽  
Comprehensive Understanding ◽  
Deviant Behaviour ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
The Social ◽  
Reaction Theory ◽  
Labelling Theory ◽  
Societal Reaction

For decades, “societal reaction theory” or “labelling theory” has provided the most significant explanation for deviant behaviour, particularly in the case of juveniles. The theory argues that once a stigma is attached to an individual, an irreversible process occurs whereby the labelled individual begins to identify as deviant and to embark on a deviant career. Hence, rather than deter bad behaviour, stigmatisation and shaming serve only to amplify it. Although the labelling perspective is rooted in sociology, we find proponents of some version of labelling theory in other disciplines, even in literature. The present study posits that in the short stories of Irish-American writer James Thomas Farrell entitled “Big Jeff,” “The Fastest Runner on Sixty-First Street,” “Young Convicts,” and “The Scarecrow,” labelling processes emerge as essential elements in a comprehensive understanding of each story. All four stories are the least critically acknowledged works by the author even though they demonstrate the author’s remarkable talent for illuminating the social and psychological factors associated with deviant behaviour among juveniles.

Fool’s Gold: Psychologists Using Disingenuous Reasoning to Mislead Legislatures into Granting Psychologists Prescriptive Authority

2003 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 489-524
Author(s):  
Brent Pollitt
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Mental Illness ◽  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
American Psychological Association ◽  
The United States ◽  
Psychotropic Medications ◽  
American Psychological ◽  
Training Requirements ◽  
Prescriptive Authority

Mental illness is a serious problem in the United States. Based on “current epidemiological estimates, at least one in five people has a diagnosable mental disorder during the course of a year.” Fortunately, many of these disorders respond positively to psychotropic medications. While psychiatrists write some of the prescriptions for psychotropic medications, primary care physicians write more of them. State legislatures, seeking to expand patient access to pharmacological treatment, granted physician assistants and nurse practitioners prescriptive authority for psychotropic medications. Over the past decade other groups have gained some form of prescriptive authority. Currently, psychologists comprise the primary group seeking prescriptive authority for psychotropic medications.The American Society for the Advancement of Pharmacotherapy (“ASAP”), a division of the American Psychological Association (“APA”), spearheads the drive for psychologists to gain prescriptive authority. The American Psychological Association offers five main reasons why legislatures should grant psychologists this privilege: 1) psychologists’ education and clinical training better qualify them to diagnose and treat mental illness in comparison with primary care physicians; 2) the Department of Defense Psychopharmacology Demonstration Project (“PDP”) demonstrated non-physician psychologists can prescribe psychotropic medications safely; 3) the recommended post-doctoral training requirements adequately prepare psychologists to prescribe safely psychotropic medications; 4) this privilege will increase availability of mental healthcare services, especially in rural areas; and 5) this privilege will result in an overall reduction in medical expenses, because patients will visit only one healthcare provider instead of two–one for psychotherapy and one for medication.

A Tribute to the Late William J. Curran

1996 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 274-275
Author(s):  
O. Lawrence ◽  
J.D. Gostin
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Mental Illness ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Mental Health Care ◽  
Harvard University ◽  
Legal Medicine ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
International Institute ◽  
University Professor

In the summer of 1979, a group of experts on law, medicine, and ethics assembled in Siracusa, Sicily, under the auspices of the International Commission of Jurists and the International Institute of Higher Studies in Criminal Science, to draft guidelines on the rights of persons with mental illness. Sitting across the table from me was a quiet, proud man of distinctive intelligence, William J. Curran, Frances Glessner Lee Professor of Legal Medicine at Harvard University. Professor Curran was one of the principal drafters of those guidelines. Many years later in 1991, after several subsequent re-drafts by United Nations (U.N.) Rapporteur Erica-Irene Daes, the text was adopted by the U.N. General Assembly as the Principles for the Protection of Persons with Mental Illness and for the Improvement of Mental Health Care. This was the kind of remarkable achievement in the field of law and medicine that Professor Curran repeated throughout his distinguished career.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document