HIV positive men as fathers: Accounts of displacement, ir/responsibility and paternal emergence

It is now apparent that socio-cultural constructions of masculinity variously impact men’s experiences of their HIV positive status, yet how being a father can feature in this mix remains under-researched. This study employed in-depth semi-structured interviews and Foucauldian-informed discourse analysis to explore the accounts of six self-identifying heterosexual fathers (four black African migrants, two white European) who had been living with HIV from five to 24 years. While the HIV-related literature calls for the need to subvert ‘traditional’ expressions of masculinity as a means of promoting HIV prevention and HIV health, we argue that the lived experience for HIV positive men as fathers is more socially, discursively and thus more psychologically nuanced. We illustrate this by highlighting ways in which HIV positive men as fathers are not simply making sense of themselves as a HIV positive man for whom the modern (new) man and father positions are useful strategies for adapting to HIV and combating associated stigma. Discourses of modern and patriarchal fatherhoods, a gender-specific discourse of irresponsibility, and the neoliberal conflation of heath and self-responsibility are also at work in the sense making frames that HIV positive men, who are also fathers, can variously deploy. Our analysis shows how this discursive mix can underpin possibilities of often conflicted meaning and identity when living as a man and father with HIV in the UK, and specifically how discourses of fatherhood and HIV ‘positive’ health can complicate these men’s expressions and inhabitations of masculinity.

A critical analysis of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services policy in England, 2000‐2015

Policy in Child and Adolescent Mental Health (CAMH) in England has undergone radical changes in the last 15 years, with far reaching implications for funding models, access to services and service delivery. Using corpus analysis and critical discourse analysis, we explore how childhood, mental health, and CAMHS are constituted in 15 policy documents, 9 pre‐2010, and 6 post 2010. We trace how these constructions have changed over time, and consider the practice implications of these changes. We identify how children’s distress is individualised, through medicalising discourses and shifting understandings of the relationship between socioeconomic context and mental health. This is evidenced in a shift from seeing children’s mental health challenges as produced by social and economic inequities, to a view that children’s mental health must be addressed early to prevent future socio‐economic burden. We consider the implications CAMHS policies for the relationship between children, families, mental health services and the state. The paper concludes by exploring how concepts of ‘parity of esteem’ and ‘stigma reduction’ may inadvertently exacerbate the individualisation of children’s mental health.

The Influence of Causal Explanations and Diagnostic Labeling on Psychology Students’ Beliefs About Treatments, Prognosis, Dangerousness and Unpredictability in Schizophrenia

This study explored views of 566 Italian psychology students about schizophrenia. The most frequently cited causes were psychological traumas (68%) and heredity (54%). Thirty-three percent of students firmly believed that people with the condition could recover. Reporting heredity among the causes, and identifying schizophrenia were both associated with prognostic pessimism, greater confidence in pharmacological treatments and lower confidence in psychological treatments. Schizophrenia labeling was also associated with higher perception of unpredictability and dangerousness. Compared to first year students, fourth/fifth year students more frequently reported heredity among the causes, and were more pessimistic about schizophrenia recovery. Stigma topics should be included in future psychologists’ education.