Search

One of the obstacles to understanding the links between social inequality and mental health distress is the reliance on heterogeneous diagnostic categories. In this paper, it is argued that a solution to this problem is to explore more homogenous experiences of distress. This paper investigates one particular form of distress: paranoia. The relationship between social inequality and paranoia is then examined, focusing on two aspects. Firstly, it is argued that social inequality might affect the experience of paranoia itself since the experience of the surveillance encountered in the everyday use of public space may vary depending on one's location in social categories like gender, 'race' and culture and class (these social categories are, of course, themselves stratified by social inequality). Secondly, mental health service users' locations in these categories may influence the way that the plausibility of ostensibly paranoid claims are evaluated by mental health professionals. Within the discussion of each category, links are drawn between community and clinical samples to understand how the experience of paranoia may be influenced by these social categories. The paper concludes with implications for research and policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this paper is to propose a conceptual framework for exploring the ways in which class and gender interact in occupational fields. In recent years, very little research has been specifically concerned with the relationship between gender and class. Much of the literature which grapples with the question of how gender and class interact contains theoretical limitations which appear to stem from a reliance on categorical theories of both class and gender. In this paper it is proposed that, when used in conjunction, the approaches of Bourdieu and Butler provide a framework for exploring class and gender in terms of embodied practice. In order to illustrate the possibilities enabled by 'appropriating Bourdieu and adding Butler', the paper suggests ways in which this conceptual framework makes possible the examination of the complex relations between gender and class within one particular area of 'women's work': the field of nursing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social exchange theory (SET) provides a comprehensive description of how people interact within relationships, as well as how they make decisions outside of partnerships and groups. This theory, how- ever, does not address how social structure and power processes influence this exchange. Specifically, it fails to recognize how gender shapes the way people behave within relationships. In this paper, we summarize the constructs and assumptions of SET, critique the theory and highlight areas of omission related to gender, and we address culture and other contextual issues that may affect the application of this theory. Finally, we provide a case example demonstrating how clinicians and researchers may consider gender issues in a social exchange process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]