Search

This discussion paper offers a critical provocation to my mental health nursing colleagues. Drawing upon David Graeber's account of bullshit work, work that is increasingly meaningless for workers, I pose the question: Is mental health nursing a bullshit job? Ever‐increasing time spent on record keeping as opposed to direct care appears to represent a Graeberian bullshitisation of mental health nurses' work. In addition, core aspects of the role are not immune from bullshit. Professional rhetoric would have us believe that mental health nursing is a therapeutically beneficent occupation organised around ideals of care and compassion and providing fulfilling work for practitioners. Yet, there are some key characteristics of the experience of mental health nursing work that afford alternative judgements on its value and meaningfulness. Not least of these is the fact that many mental health nurses feel quite existentially unsettled in the practise of their work and many service users do not recognise the professional ideal, especially when compelled into increasingly coercive and restrictive services. In this context, Graeber's thesis is explored for its applicability to mental health nursing with a conclusion that many aspects of mental health nursing work are commensurate with bullshit but that mental health care can possibly be redeemed from bullshitisation by authentically democratising reforms. Engaging with posthumanist ideas, this exploration involves a flexing of aspects of Graeber's theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Of the various debates surrounding harm reduction, a conceptual tension that perhaps has the most relevance for the provision of services is that of harm reduction as a technical solution versus a contextualized social practice. The aim of this paper was to examine this conceptual tension. First, the two perspectives will be presented through the use of examples. Second, philosophical drivers that serve to underpin and justify each perspective will be explicated at the level of the knowledge that we privilege; the ideologies that we subscribe to; and the interests that we stand to serve. In this paper, I argue that the existing tension between technical and social approaches to harm reduction is embedded within discord pertaining to ways of knowing, paradigms of inquiry, prevailing ideologies, and notions of harm and risk. Building on these sources of tension, I suggest a means of philosophical reconciliation between the two approaches and ways forward, namely through acknowledging multiple sources of knowledge, through embracing paradigmatic incommensurability, through considering alternative conceptions of people who use drugs as political subjects, through involving service providers and end‐users in shared decision‐making, and lastly through reaffirming people who use drugs as the intended beneficiaries of services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nursing is possible owing to a series of intricate systemic relations. Building on an established tradition of sociological research, we critically analysed the nursing profession in Chile, with an emphasis on its education system, in the light of social systems theory. The paper's aim was to explore basic characteristics of nursing education as a system, so as to outline its current evolution. Drawing on recent developments in nursing, we applied an empirical framework to identify and discuss functionally differentiated systems that are relevant to nursing and observe communications between them. We found that the dynamics of nursing as a whole develop from communications with closely related systems, including the nursing profession and the education system more broadly. While the discipline (as a system of representations) strives to control the profession (as an applied occupational field), the necessities of practicing nurses imply other forces mediating the making of the profession, a process framed by market dynamics in education and health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]