ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2023
"Believe me, only I know how I feel." An autoethnographic account of experiences of epistemic injustice in mental health care.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- The experiences of people diagnosed with severe mental illness and colorectal cancer: A qualitative study.Australasian psychiatry : bulletin of Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists · 2026Article
- Collective responsibility and ecological thinking in eating disorders: moving beyond individualistic models of illness and recovery.Journal of eating disorders · 2026Article
- Whose voice is heard? Mental health professionals' involvement, epistemic injustice, and the ethics of psychiatric advance directives.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Review
- Recovery as an intersubjective process: an autoethnography of experiential knowledge in mental health.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Scaling injustice: epistemic harm in DID and what clinical records will teach AI.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- "The Idea of Not Having to Prove Anything in the Way I Needed, That Would Be Really Helpful": Exploring Adolescents' and Parents' Understanding of Youth Participation During Patient-Initiated Brief Admission Enrollment in Psychiatric Inpatient Care.Qualitative health research · 2025Article
- Between epistemic injustice and therapeutic jurisprudence: Coronial processes involving families of autistic people, people with learning disabilities and/or mental ill health.Sociology of health & illness · 2025Article
- Struggling for epistemic and emotional justice-a collaborative autoethnography of personal assistance.Frontiers in sociology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In Sweden, support and service for people with disabilities is provided under the Swedish disability legislation, which has a clear focus on the individual's right to a life like that of any other citizen and on promoting equality and participation in society. Nevertheless, having a physical impairment makes it clear that equal mental health care is not provided in practice. This becomes particularly salient when there is a need for mental health in-patient care. In this article, the aim is to explore our own experiences of epistemic injustice in relation to mental health care provision in a situation where one of us has a mobility impairment that require the presence of personal assistants in everyday life. Critical personal narrative is applied to highlight the different, but intertwined experiences of a young female mental health user with a physical disability and her mother. Diary entrances, shared discussions and extracts from health care records are used to illustrate how epistemic injustice may occur in health care practices. In the analysis, we use Fricker's concepts that relate to different aspects of epistemic injustice, to show how power is exerted. Healthcare professionals' inability to value and integrate patients experience-based knowledge into practice where the lack of a holistic perspective visualizes what happens when people do not fit into predefined categories. Instead of strengthening patients' rights, health care professionals discredit patients' and family members knowledge, and thereby giving themselves epistemic privilege. People with the combined experience of both disabilities and mental health issues are vulnerable to epistemic injustice and epistemic harm since they are commonly denied both epistemic credibility and authority. Our results highlight the importance of counteracting resilient structures of social privilege and power and identifying and, in as far as possible, removing the mechanisms that exclude the epistemic resources of people with disabilities and their family members from being part of shared epistemic resources.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.