A influência do “modelo centrado na doença” no uso de medicamentos para problemas de aprendizagem na escola

IF 4.1 2区社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE Politics & Society Pub Date : 2021-01-29 DOI:10.5007/2175-7984.2020.E75147

F. Brzozowski

引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this article, I ponder the ways the “disease-centered model” of drug action in Psychiatry, proposed by Joanna Moncrieff, may influence the use of drugs such as methylphenidate (Ritalina®) for the treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Many diagnoses in child mental health are identified at school, for instance ADHD. ADHD is frequently explained as being the result of a brain unbalance, and methylphenidate would be a specific treatment to correct this unbalance. This kind of explanation characterizes the “disease-centered model” of drug action in Psychiatry. We argue that this model amplifies the medicalization of childhood and learning at school, making common the use of drugs to “correct” behaviors and increase academic performance.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

“以疾病为中心的模式”对学校使用药物解决学习问题的影响

在这篇文章中，我思考了Joanna Moncrieff提出的“以疾病为中心的精神病学药物作用模式”可能会影响哌甲酯（Ritalina®）等药物治疗注意力缺陷多动障碍（ADHD）的使用。许多儿童心理健康的诊断都是在学校里发现的，例如多动症。多动症经常被解释为大脑失衡的结果，哌甲酯是纠正这种失衡的一种特殊治疗方法。这种解释是精神病学中药物作用的“以疾病为中心的模式”的特征。我们认为，这种模式放大了儿童和学校学习的医学化，使人们普遍使用药物来“纠正”行为和提高学习成绩。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Politics & Society Multiple-

CiteScore

5.00

自引率

4.20%

发文量

期刊介绍： Politics & Society is a peer-reviewed journal. All submitted papers are read by a rotating editorial board member. If a paper is deemed potentially publishable, it is sent to another board member, who, if agreeing that it is potentially publishable, sends it to a third board member. If and only if all three agree, the paper is sent to the entire editorial board for consideration at board meetings. The editorial board meets three times a year, and the board members who are present (usually between 9 and 14) make decisions through a deliberative process that also considers written reports from absent members. Unlike many journals which rely on 1–3 individual blind referee reports and a single editor with final say, the peers who decide whether to accept submitted work are thus the full editorial board of the journal, comprised of scholars from various disciplines, who discuss papers openly, with author names known, at meetings. Editors are required to disclose potential conflicts of interest when evaluating manuscripts and to recuse themselves from voting if such a potential exists.

期刊最新文献

Bringing Household Finance Back In: House Prices and the Missing Macroeconomics of Comparative Political Economy Who Pays for Environmental Policy? Business Power and the Design of State-Level Climate Policies* Supervising Local Cadres in China: The Quest for Authoritarian Accountability Rethinking Antitrust for the Cloud Era Antitrust and Equal Liberty