Centring the voices of survivors of child sexual abuse in research: an act of hermeneutic justice.

Survivors of child sexual abuse (CSA) are known to hold silence and create distance between themselves and service providers for self-protection, as groomed behaviour or to protect the listener from vicarious trauma. Silence for many survivors has also been reinforced as a beneficial action by previous experiences of disclosing and being rejected, challenged, or disbelieved. How can researchers be sure the same dynamic is not playing out in research interviews? Generating reliable research data is an imperative and an act of epistemic justice that enables CSA survivors to testify to the suffering caused by abuse and subsequent trauma distress and to contribute to social discourse for change. Fricker, however, notes that the precursor to testimonial justice is hermeneutic justice. Hermeneutic justice pivots on the dual action of accurate understanding and interpretation, but CSA experiences may be beyond the comprehension of untraumatised listeners because their own frame of reference renders them unable or unwilling (even if unconsciously) to entertain the truth of such human depravity and cruelty. If survivors are not understood, their testimonies can be misconstrued or oftentimes excluded from the generation of epistemic knowledge, leaving the survivors unable to make sense of, and process, their experiences. These are crucial issues for researchers in the field of CSA and other crimes of sexual and gendered abuse. This study considers the operationalisation of a participatory research approach held within a lived experience research paradigm. Such methodologies advocate for peer involvement, which is becoming more widely recognised as supporting testimonial justice and the accurate understanding and interpretation of survivors' testimonies. The issue of validating the methodology and methods is considered, exploring a rigorous data audit and researcher reflexivity as contributors to trustworthy data. Peer and participant safety when researching through lived experience is addressed. Data from a doctoral research study are used to illustrate this article.

Avoiding psychological (re)traumatisation in dentistry when working with patients who are adult survivors of child sex abuse.

Introduction Seven percent of the adult population in the UK, including one in six women, report unwanted sexual experiences before the age of 16. The impacts of psychological trauma following child sexual abuse (CSA) creates difficulties for many survivors in accessing dental care due to fears of reminders of abuse, the power imbalance with the dentist and triggered traumatic responses.Aims To analyse and report CSA survivor perspectives of dental care and offer suggestions for practice.Method Qualitative semi-structured interviews of 17 CSA survivors generated data as part of a broader study investigating trust and trustworthiness in survivor-professional relationships. The range of dental interactions and the needs survivors described when receiving dental treatment are presented. Transcripts were analysed using NVivo software and thematic analysis methodology.Results Three main themes were identified: the dental encounter ('it really panics me'); the opportunity to disclose; and choice and control.Conclusion This is the first UK study to present qualitative data from CSA survivors about their experiences of dental care. Survivors wish to access dental care but tailored support is needed to ameliorate reminders of abuse and traumatic stress triggers. Trauma-informed care may address difficulties with treatment if dental staff adopt flexible approaches and work collaboratively with survivors to facilitate relational safety. (Please note, in this paper, 'survivors' refers to those sexually abused as children).

Recovery priorities of people with psychosis in acute mental health in-patient settings: a Q-methodology study.

BACKGROUND: Personal recovery from psychosis has been explored extensively in community samples but there has been little exploration with people currently receiving care from an acute mental health in-patient setting. AIMS: The aim of this study was to explore the personal recovery priorities of people experiencing psychosis who are currently receiving care from an acute mental health in-patient ward. METHOD: A Q-methodology mixed-methods approach was adopted. Thirty-eight participants were recruited from an outer London acute mental health hospital. They were required to sort 54 statements regarding personal recovery from most important to least important to reflect their recovery priorities. Thirty-six were included in the final analysis. RESULTS: Analysis revealed four distinct viewpoints relating to factors that promote recovery in the acute mental health in-patient setting. These were: stability, independence and 'keeping a roof over your head'; hope, optimism and enhancing well-being; personal change, self-management and social support; and symptom reduction through mental health support. CONCLUSIONS: Acute mental health in-patient wards need to ensure that they are considering the personal recovery needs of in-patients. Symptom reduction was valued by some, but broad psychosocial factors were also of priority.

Community Psychology as a Process of Citizen Participation in Health Policy Comment on "The Rise of Post-truth Populism in Pluralist Liberal Democracies: Challenges for Health Policy".

This brief commentary discusses a recent paper by Speed and Mannion that explores "The Rise of post truth populism in liberal democracies: challenges for health policy." It considers their assertion that through meaningful democratic engagement in health policy, some of the risks brought about by an exclusionary populist politics can be mediated. With an overview of what participation means in modern healthcare policy and implementation, the field of community psychology is presented as one way to engage marginalized groups at risk of exploitation or exclusion by nativist populist policy.