Child and adolescent mental health · 2026
Narrative Matters: Between hope and cynicism - competing narratives and the moral economy of child and adolescent psychiatry.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sibeoni Jordan, Revah-Levy Anne
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) are currently marked by a paradox: growing public recognition of youth mental health difficulties coincides with increasingly fragile and underresourced services. Beyond organisational strain, the field is shaped by competing narratives about its mission and limits (hopeful progressivism which emphasises innovation, early intervention and developmental plasticity; on the other, defensive pessimism which foregrounds chronicity, clinical realism and institutional constraint.
AIMS: To examine how these competing narratives operate within CAMHS and to articulate an alternative orientation capable of supporting ethical clinical practice.
MATERIALS & METHODS: A conceptual and narrative analysis drawing on medical humanities and social sciences perspectives, in particular the concept of moral economy, illustrated by a clinical vignette.
RESULTS: Hopeful progressivism and defensive pessimism function as moral postures that distribute responsibility, legitimacy and emotional labour within institutions, with hope and cynicism operating as institutional currencies. Although seemingly opposed, both positions risk obscuring the structural determinants of care and relocating difficulties onto clinicians or families.
DISCUSSION: Rather than choosing between optimism and cynicism, CAMHS may benefit from holding these narratives in productive tension through a dialogical, reflexive approach that re-centres families and re-politicizes the conditions of care.
CONSLUSION: A form of realistic hope, grounded in developmental temporality and attentive to material conditions is essential to ethical and clinically meaningful care.
AIMS: To examine how these competing narratives operate within CAMHS and to articulate an alternative orientation capable of supporting ethical clinical practice.
MATERIALS & METHODS: A conceptual and narrative analysis drawing on medical humanities and social sciences perspectives, in particular the concept of moral economy, illustrated by a clinical vignette.
RESULTS: Hopeful progressivism and defensive pessimism function as moral postures that distribute responsibility, legitimacy and emotional labour within institutions, with hope and cynicism operating as institutional currencies. Although seemingly opposed, both positions risk obscuring the structural determinants of care and relocating difficulties onto clinicians or families.
DISCUSSION: Rather than choosing between optimism and cynicism, CAMHS may benefit from holding these narratives in productive tension through a dialogical, reflexive approach that re-centres families and re-politicizes the conditions of care.
CONSLUSION: A form of realistic hope, grounded in developmental temporality and attentive to material conditions is essential to ethical and clinically meaningful care.