(Eden) Please follow Assignment instructionHello, I hope you are well.
I am required to write a reflective essay addressingmy learning experienceof a specific topic studied in the Module.I HAVE CHOOSEN THE TOPIC :STIGMA, LABELLING AND STEREOTYPING.I have attached theslides we learnt in the class for the topic and the article attachedin the class module please use both slides and the articleattached. and please usedifferentacademicresources aswell.Please use Kolb's or Gibbs reflective model.PLEASE FOLLOW THE ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONS VERY WELL.MAKE SURE REFERENCELISTS ARE ON ALPHABETICAL ORDER.WORD COUNT 2500 WORDS.
Many thanks.
SH4008: ASSIGNMENT 2 You are required to write a Reflective Essay about a topic studied on the module, drawing on your reflective journal. Word limit: 2500 words. Weighting: 60% Submit via Turnitin in ‘Online Submission’ by the deadline of: 3:00pm Friday 14th May 2021 Assignment instructions: You are required to write a Reflective Essay addressing your learning experience of a specific Topic studied on the module. You may choose to write about ANY of the Topics we have studied so far (e.g. Empowerment, Anti-Oppressive Practice, Human Rights, Equity, Inclusion, etc). You may use a reflective model to structure your essay. We have studied different reflective models on the module (e.g. the Gibbs Reflective Model). Your Reflective Essay should contain the following elements: 1. Report (description & Feelings) your learning about a Topic and explain why it is important to your professional practice. Give your initial response to learning about the Topic. Recount your learning about the Topic on which you have chosen to reflect. Explain it and its context. Your initial response to learning about the Topic can show where you stood before you started to analyse the situation. What were your initial feelings about it? 2. Relate learning about the Topic to your own skills, professional experience or discipline knowledge. Describe any similar or related experiences you've had and whether the conditions were the same or different. Make connections between this and your previous knowledge and experience of similar situations. Discuss how well you think things went in terms of what you learnt. What was good and bad about the learning experience? 3. Reason about (discuss/analyse) learning about the Topic to show an understanding of how things work in this discipline or professional field. You should highlight significant factors in your learning experience showing why they are important for a new understanding. Relate these back to the academic literature including theoretical or research-based literature as appropriate. Use evidence where appropriate. Discuss different perspectives involved e.g. ethical, social, legal, organisational, professional. 4. Reconstruct your understanding for future practice (Conclusion & Action Plan) Outline the changes in your understanding and/or behaviour as a result of your learning about the Topic and your reflection upon it. Explain the implications for this in your future professional practice. What actions will you take and why? Further guidance on reflective writing and using reflective models is provided in your Learning Materials & in Assessment Details. Note the dates of Reflective Writing workshops and assignment tutorials in your module handbook. Your Group tutor will provide support and guidance during these sessions. Key Issues: stigma, labelling & stereotyping Stigma The word originated from the Greeks. Stigma referred to a sign burnt or cut into the body to demarcate slaves, criminals, and social out-casts as “ritually polluted” people. It is currently used to refer to any conditions that marks out the bearer as ‘culturally unacceptable’ or ‘inferior’ Stigma Stigma refers to a negative attribute that socially discredits an individual and confers a ‘deviant’ status Stigma – a label that associates an individual with some negative characteristics Goffman (1963) describes stigma as the difference between the virtual social identity and the real social identity GOFFMAN (1959/63): A BRIEF BACKGROUND • He is an interactionist and examines the way in which social interaction can, and does break down • Dramaturgical theory – The notion that a person's identity is not a stable and independent psychological entity; it is constantly changed as the person interacts with others. • Dramaturgy - Views people as actors who are continually involved in "impression management“ in their daily interaction. Goffman differentiates between "front stage" and "back stage" behaviour. Before an interaction with another, an individual usually prepares a role, or impression, that he or she wants to make on the other. Unfortunate infringements may take place, in which a backstage performance is interrupted by someone not meant to see it Goffman (1959) sees embarrassment as a significant social and moral problem Stigmatising conditions are embarrassing and allows for an infringement of the back-stage attributes of individuals Goffman theorises that: the stigmatised person is seen by the so called ‘normals’ as inferior ‘not quite human’ and as a result discriminated against the stigmatised individual might also have additional imperfections imputed to them on the basis of the original stigmata – Stereotypes are created the stigmatised is seen as having a perpetually flawed social identity. Goffman (1963) theorised about courtesy stigma or the discrimination of people associated with the stigmatised Erving Goffman (1963) identified three types of stigma: 1. Stigmas of the body - Abominations of the body. 2. Stigmas of character - Blemishes of individual character 3. Stigma as applied to social collectivities /socio-cultural groups (The tribal stigmas of race and religion) Scambler (2004) differentiates between: ‘Felt stigma’ (i.e, the shame of being identified with a discrediting condition and the fear of encountering enacted stigma) and Enacted stigma (i.e. actual episodes of discrimination, both formal and informal, against people with a stigmata solely on the grounds of their having a stigmatising condition). Coping mechanisms for the stigmatised: The stigma in some individuals is not known about , but could make them ‘discreditable’ - if publicly known – Task: Passing as normal, Covering and managing expectations The stigmatising condition in some individuals is obvious or ‘widely known about’ – ‘discredited’ – Task: managing tension, information control and withdrawal Goffman’s description of stigma is closely aligned to the ‘Labelling theory’ Scambler describes a ‘hidden distress’ model - this is the notion that people with a stigmata are fearful of experiencing enacted stigma and pursue an active policy of non-disclosure. This may also increase the stress of managing their disorder, with the result that stigma has a far more disruptive effect on their lives. Link & Phelan (2001) assert that the disease process is exacerbated by stigma-related stress. Jacoby, Snape & Baker (2005) describe stigma as a potentially major contributor to the illness burden The level of felt and enacted stigma could be influenced by socio-cultural values Deviance – relates to any behaviour or condition that contradicts recognised social norms in society or in a specific group Parsons (1951) defined illness as a deviance He perceives illness as capable of fracturing the social system as the sick are unable to perform their social role The doctors role is to restore social order by legitimating entry and exit from the sick role Three levels of deviance and the stigmatisation process have been described (Lemert, 1967): 1. Primary deviance - original violation/deviance/ and societal reaction to this non-conformity to societal norms 2. Secondary deviance – The deviant’s reaction to negative societal reaction (self fulfilling prophecy) 3. Tertiary deviance – The stigmatised persons’ reaction to the stigma from others leads to master status; a label that overshadows all other characteristics – the secondary deviant attempts to re-label certain behaviours as normal rather than deviant Labelling Labelling refers to the process of identifying and ascribing a label or negative qualifying attribute to an individual’s characteristics It refers to identifying certain characteristics of individuals and giving it a negative label (Lemert, 1967) Becker, (1963) presents a core assumption of labelling theory: ‘deviance is not the quality of the act the individual commits but a consequence of the label that others apply to it’ Labeling, stereotyping, separation from others, and consequent status loss are elements of stigma expressed in a power situation Freidson’s (1965) description of illness as deviance from societal norms – or rule breaking behaviour - dwells largely on the exploration of primary and secondary deviance Scheff (1966) posits that mental illness is a product of societal views and reaction. i.e. mental illness is just a product of being labelled insane and treated as deviant ..%5C..%5CHealth%20Illness%20and%20Society%5CWeekly%20notes%5C3%20Oct%202008%5CThe%20social%20construction%20of%20official%20statistics.ppt Key themes from literature on stigma Cultural factors are involved in the stigmatisation process Stigmatisation is a product of power imbalance in society – e.g. labelling, stereotyping e.t.c Factors that define the level of stigma suffered include: (1) Degree of presumed complicity of sufferer (2) Degree of discomfort caused in social relations Selected bibliography & References Becker (1963) Outsiders: studies in the sociology of deviance Goffman, E (1963), Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity Scambler, G (2004), Health related stigma. Sociology of Health & Illness 31 411-455 Freidson (1965) Profession of Medicine, New York Scheff (1966) Being Mentally Ill: A Sociological Theory, Chicago Link & Phelan (2001) Conceptualising Stigma, Annual Review of Sociology, 27 363-385 Jacoby, Snape & Baker (2005) Epilepsy & Social Identity: the stigma of a neurological disorder, Lancet Neurology, 4 (3) 171-8 Parsons (1951) Illness & the Role of the Physician: A Sociological Perspective Exploring the relationship between stigma and help‐seeking for mental illness in African‐descended faith communities in the UK Exploring the relationship between stigma and help-seeking for mental illness in African-descended faith communities in the UK Nadia Mantovani PhD Msc BSc Hons,* Micol Pizzolati PhD BSc† and Dawn Edge PhD MRes BSc Hons‡ *Population Health Research Institute, St George’s University of London, London, UK, †Department of Economics, Management, Society and Institutions, Universit�a del Molise, Campobasso, Italy, ‡Centre for New Treatments & Understanding in Mental Health (CeNTrUM), Institute of Brain, Behaviour & Mental Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK Correspondence Nadia Mantovani Population Health Research Institute St George’s University of London Cranmer Terrace London SW17 0RE UK E-mail:
[email protected] Accepted for publication 22March 2016 Keywords: Black and minority ethnic groups, culture, faith based organisations, help-seeking, mental illness, stigma, UK Abstract Background Stigma related tomental illness affects all ethnic groups, con- tributing to the production and maintenance of mental illness and restricting access to care and support. However, stigma is especially preva- lent in minority communities, thus potentially increasing ethnically based disparities. Little is known of the links between stigma and help-seeking formental illness inAfrican-descended populations in theUK. Objective and study design Building on the evidence that faith- based organizations (FBOs) can aid the development of effective public health strategies, this qualitative study used semi-structured interviews with faith groups to explore the complex ways in which stigma influences help-seeking for mental illness in African- descended communities. A thematic approach to data analysis was applied to the entire data