Weiste Elina, Stevanovic Melisa, Uusitalo Lise-Lotte, Toiviainen Hanna
Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Finland.
Tampere University, Finland.
Health (London). 2024 May;28(3):450-469. doi: 10.1177/13634593231156822. Epub 2023 Feb 27.
Peer-based interventions are increasingly used for delivering mental health services to help people with an illness re-examine their situation and accept their illness as part of their life story. The role of the peer supporter in these interventions, known as experts-by-experience (EbE), is situated between mutual peer support and semi-professional service delivery, and they face the challenge of balancing an asymmetric, professional relationship with a reciprocal, mutuality-based, equal relationship. This article investigates how EbEs tackle this challenge when responding to clients' stories about their personal, distressing experiences in peer-based groups in psychiatric services. The results show how the EbEs responded to their clients' experience-sharing with two types of turns of talk. In the first response type, the EbEs highlighted reciprocal experience-sharing, nudging the clients toward accepting their illness. This invoked mutual affiliation and more problem-talk from the clients. In the second response type, the EbEs compromised reciprocal experience-sharing and advised clients on how to accept their illness in their everyday lives. This was considered less affiliative in relation to the client's problem description, and the sequence was brought to a close. Both response types involved epistemic asymmetries that needed to be managed in the interaction. Based on our analysis, semi-professional, experience-based expertise involves constant epistemic tensions, as the participants struggle to retain the mutual orientation toward peer-based experience-sharing and affiliation.
基于同伴的干预措施越来越多地用于提供心理健康服务,以帮助患病者重新审视自己的情况,并将疾病视为其人生经历的一部分而接受。同伴支持者在这些干预措施中的角色,即所谓的“经验专家”(EbE),介于同伴间的相互支持和半专业服务提供之间,他们面临着平衡不对称的专业关系与基于互惠、相互性和平等的关系的挑战。本文探讨了经验专家在精神科服务中基于同伴的小组里回应客户关于其个人痛苦经历的故事时,是如何应对这一挑战的。结果显示了经验专家如何通过两种谈话转向方式回应客户的经验分享。在第一种回应方式中,经验专家强调相互的经验分享,促使客户接受自己的疾病。这引发了客户的相互认同和更多关于问题的讨论。在第二种回应方式中,经验专家在相互经验分享上做出妥协,并就客户如何在日常生活中接受自己的疾病提供建议。相对于客户的问题描述,这被认为缺乏认同感,谈话也就结束了。两种回应方式都涉及到互动中需要处理的认知不对称。基于我们的分析,半专业的、基于经验的专业知识涉及持续的认知紧张,因为参与者努力保持对基于同伴的经验分享和认同的相互导向。