Introduction: Journaling and Mental Health during COVID-19: Insights from the Pandemic Journaling Project.

In this article, we introduce the SSM-MH Special Issue "Journaling and Mental Health during COVID-19: Insights from the Pandemic Journaling Project," which presents findings from the Pandemic Journaling Project (PJP). PJP is an online journaling platform and mixed-methods research study created in May 2020 to provide ordinary people around the world an opportunity to chronicle the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in their lives-for themselves and for posterity. The essays in this collection demonstrate how journaling via an online platform can help illuminate experiences of mental wellbeing and distress, with important implications for both research and clinical practice. We begin by introducing the Pandemic Journaling Project and describing our procedures for generating the data subsets analyzed in the papers collected here. We then outline the principal interventions of the special issue as a whole, introduce the papers, and identify a number of cross-cutting themes and broader contributions. Finally, we point toward key questions for future research and therapeutic practice by highlighting the three-fold value of online journaling as a research method, a therapeutic strategy, and a tool for advancing social justice. We focus in particular on how this innovative methodological approach holds promise as both a modality for psychotherapeutic intervention and a form of grassroots collaborative ethnography. We suggest that our methods create new opportunities for confronting the impact of pandemics and other large-scale events that generate radical social change and affect population-level mental health.

Rethinking flourishing: Critical insights and qualitative perspectives from the U.S. Midwest.

In recent years, human flourishing and its relationship to mental health have attracted significant attention in a wide range of fields. As an interdisciplinary, mixed-methods team with strong roots in critical medical anthropology and critical public health, we are intrigued by the possibility that a focus on flourishing may reinvigorate health research, policy, and clinical care in transformative ways. Yet current proposals to this effect, we contend, must be met with caution. In particular, we call attention to the troubling disconnect between current research on flourishing, on one hand, and the voluminous body of scholarship demonstrating the detrimental impact of structural inequities on health, on the other. We illuminate this blind spot in two ways. We begin with a critical assessment of leading conceptions to flourishing in positive psychology, which are compared to current approaches in the critical social sciences of health. In the second half of the paper, we support our argument by presenting original findings from a mixed-methods study with a diverse sample of interviewees in the Midwestern U.S. city of Cleveland, Ohio (n=167). Our interviewees' rich narrative accounts, which we analyze both quantitatively and qualitatively, highlight important ways in which everyday understandings of flourishing diverge from prevailing scholarly accounts. Given these gaps and blind spots, now is an opportune time for robust interdisciplinary discussion about the implicit values and presumptions underpinning leading approaches to flourishing and their wide-ranging implications for research, policy, and clinical care in mental health fields and beyond.

Flourishing: migration and health in social context.

Health and the capacity to flourish are deeply intertwined. For members of vulnerable migrant groups, systemic inequalities and structural forms of marginalisation and exclusion create health risks, impede access to needed care and interfere with the ability to achieve one's full potential. Migrants often have limited access to healthcare, and they frequently are portrayed as less deserving than others of the resources needed to lead a healthy and flourishing life. Under these circumstances, clinicians, healthcare institutions and global health organisations have a moral and ethical obligation to consider the role they can-and do-play in either advancing or impeding migrants' health and their capacity to flourish. Drawing on case studies from three world regions, we propose concrete steps clinicians and health institutions can take in order to better serve migrant patients. These include recommendations that can help improve understanding of the complex circumstances of migrants' lives, strengthen collaboration between care providers and non-medical partners and transform the social, economic and structural circumstances that impede flourishing and harm health. Developing new strategies to promote the flourishing of precarious migrants can strengthen our collective ability to re-envision and redesign health systems and structures to value the health, dignity and bodily integrity of all patients-especially the most vulnerable-and to promote flourishing for all.

Deservingness: migration and health in social context.

This article brings the social science concept of 'deservingness' to bear on clinical cases of transnational migrant patients. Based on the authors' medical social science research, health delivery practice and clinical work from multiple locations in Africa. Europe and the Americas, the article describes three clinical cases in which assumptions of deservingness have significant implications for the morbidity and mortality of migrant patients. The concept of deservingness allows us to maintain a critical awareness of the often unspoken presumptions of which categories of patients are more or less deserving of access to and quality of care, regardless of their formal legal eligibility. Many transnational migrants with ambiguous legal status who rely on public healthcare experience exclusion from care or poor treatment based on notions of deservingness held by health clinic staff, clinicians and health system planners. The article proposes several implications for clinicians, health professional education, policymaking and advocacy. A critical lens on deservingness can help global health professionals, systems and policymakers confront and change entrenched patterns of unequal access to and differential quality of care for migrant patients. In this way, health professionals can work more effectively for global health equity.

Everyday Disruptions and Jewish Dilemmas: Preliminary Insights from the Pandemic Journaling Project

Notably, 12 percent of these PJP participants identify as Jewish, due likely to dissemination efforts by the University of Connecticut's Center for Judaic Studies and Contemporary Jewish Life, one of our sponsors.3 We begin by sketching the contours of the PJP itself, which was created to capture the lived realities of the coronavirus pandemic just as it began shaking the foundations of the everyday-around the world, but especially in high-rate, high-risk countries like the US. In Week 1, before contributing their first journal entries, participants are asked to complete a baseline survey (using validated survey questions wherever possible), that addresses demographics, COVID-19 exposure, and self-reported physical and mental health status. [...]other analytic projects, including this essay, will examine the challenges posed by the pandemic to members of a particular demographic group (as defined by self-reported gender, age, race-ethnicity, religion, or other features or combination of features). First is a commitment to "writing it down"-to chronicling what people are experiencing now, in their own words.