Hammell Karen Whalley
Department of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Can J Occup Ther. 2009 Apr;76(2):107-14. doi: 10.1177/000841740907600208.
Critics contend that occupational therapy's theories of occupation are culturally specific, class-bound, and ableist, and that the division of all occupations into three simplistic categories of self-care, productivity, and leisure is arbitrary, lacks supportive evidence, and promotes a doctrine of individualism.
To add to the work of critics who advocate a fundamental rethinking of occupational therapy's conceptualizations of occupation in terms of subjective qualities of experience that address intrinsic needs.
This paper suggests that if categories of occupation were informed by the ways in which people experience their occupations, these might be labelled as restorative, as ways to connect and contribute, as engagement in doing, and as ways to connect the past and present to a hopeful future.
If occupational therapists enabled diverse clients'perspectives to inform occupational categories, perhaps relationships between occupations and well-being might more easily be identified in theory and addressed in practice.
批评者认为,职业疗法的职业理论具有文化特殊性、受阶级限制且带有能力主义色彩,并且将所有职业简单地划分为自我照顾、生产活动和休闲这三类是随意的,缺乏支持证据,还宣扬个人主义学说。
为那些主张从满足内在需求的主观体验特质方面对职业疗法的职业概念进行根本性重新思考的批评者的工作增添内容。
本文指出,如果职业类别依据人们体验其职业的方式来确定,那么这些类别可能会被标记为恢复性的,作为建立联系和做出贡献的方式,作为参与行动的方式,以及作为将过去和现在与充满希望的未来联系起来的方式。
如果职业治疗师让不同客户的观点来为职业类别提供信息,那么或许在理论上能更容易识别职业与幸福感之间的关系,并在实践中加以解决。