du.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Kollegialitet, terapi och medling: expertgranskning i psykiatrimål
Umeå universitet.
Umeå universitet.
Stockholms universitet.
2002 (Swedish)In: Sociologisk forskning, ISSN 0038-0342, Vol. 39, no 3-4, 86-115 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Collegealism, therapy and mediation - experts’ interpretative repertoires in court hearings relating to compulsory psychiatric care

This article investigates the role of court appointed psychiatrists (AP) in Swedish court hearings relating to compulsory psychiatric care. Data consists of tape recordings and documents from twelve court hearings together with informal interviews with actors in court. The discourse in court is analyzed in terms of interpretative repertoires. The possibility for APs to examine each case is limited by shortage of time and resources. Furthermore, APs may have to take into account an out-of-court, professional relationship to the treating psychiatrist(CP). We find that conversation between APs and CPs frequently are carried out in a collegiate repertoire. These circumstances inhibit a detailed critical examination of the CP’s application for compulsory care, which in turn helps explaining why APs seldom assess cases different from CPs. How, then, is the AP’s status as expert reproduced in courtroom conversation? This is accomplished by using a disclosing repertoire, which invites the patient to produce incoherent talk. Expert status is also reproduced when APs give medical advise to patients in a therapeutic repertoire. Applying a mediating repertoire, APs attempt to resolve clinical conflicts between CPs and patients. As a result, the legal conflict at stake is downplayed.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Sveriges Sociologförbund , 2002. Vol. 39, no 3-4, 86-115 p.
Keyword [en]
experts, court hearings, interpretative repertoires, compulsory psychiatric care
National Category
Sociology Sociology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:du-25180OAI: oai:DiVA.org:du-25180DiVA: diva2:1109428
Note

Sociologisk Forsknings digitala arkiv

Available from: 2017-06-14 Created: 2017-06-14 Last updated: 2017-06-14Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(1702 kB)3 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 1702 kBChecksum SHA-512
75124a71c94efc110caf30e48ae0105a8492fefe375152c52f89c8f9662cc1719a7b348bade73d97074e62b95a3b7cc1c00cbdc40309caa25abdf6532a29c1c0
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Hemsida Sociologisk Forskning
In the same journal
Sociologisk forskning
SociologySociology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 3 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Total: 4 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf