Inverting the deficit model in global mental health: An examination of strengths and assets of community mental health care in Ghana, India, Occupied Palestinian territories, and South Africa.

Global mental health [GMH] scholarship and practice has typically focused on the unmet needs and barriers to mental health in communities, developing biomedical and psychosocial interventions for integration into formal health care platforms in response. In this article, we analyse four diverse settings to disrupt the emphasises on health system weaknesses, treatment gaps and barriers which can perpetuate harmful hierarchies and colonial and medical assumptions, or a 'deficit model'. We draw on the experiential knowledge of community mental health practitioners and researchers working in Ghana, India, the Occupied Palestinian Territory and South Africa to describe key assets existing in 'informal' community mental health care systems and how these are shaped by socio-political contexts. These qualitative case studies emerged from an online mutual learning process convened between 39 academic and community-based collaborators working in 24 countries who interrogated key tenets to inform a social paradigm for global mental health. Bringing together diverse expertise gained from professional practice and research, our sub-group explored the role of Community Mental Health Systems in GMH through comparative country case studies describing the features of community care beyond the health and social care system. We found that the socio-political health determinants of global economic structures in all four countries exert significant influence on local community health systems. We identified that key assets across sites included: family and community care, and support from non-profit organisations and religious and faith-based organisations. Strengthening community assets may promote reciprocal relationships between the formal and informal sectors, providing resources for support and training for communities while communities collaborate in the design and delivery of interventions rooted in localised expertise. This paper highlights the value of informal care, the unique social structures of each local context, and resources within local communities as key existing assets for mental health.

Mutuality as a method: advancing a social paradigm for global mental health through mutual learning.

PURPOSE: Calls for "mutuality" in global mental health (GMH) aim to produce knowledge more equitably across epistemic and power differences. With funding, convening, and publishing power still concentrated in institutions in the global North, efforts to decolonize GMH emphasize the need for mutual learning instead of unidirectional knowledge transfers. This article reflects on mutuality as a concept and practice that engenders sustainable relations, conceptual innovation, and queries how epistemic power can be shared. METHODS: We draw on insights from an online mutual learning process over 8 months between 39 community-based and academic collaborators working in 24 countries. They came together to advance the shift towards a social paradigm in GMH. RESULTS: Our theorization of mutuality emphasizes that the processes and outcomes of knowledge production are inextricable. Mutual learning required an open-ended, iterative, and slower paced process that prioritized trust and remained responsive to all collaborators' needs and critiques. This resulted in a social paradigm that calls for GMH to (1) move from a deficit to a strength-based view of community mental health, (2) include local and experiential knowledge in scaling processes, (3) direct funding to community organizations, and (4) challenge concepts, such as trauma and resilience, through the lens of lived experience of communities in the global South. CONCLUSION: Under the current institutional arrangements in GMH, mutuality can only be imperfectly achieved. We present key ingredients of our partial success at mutual learning and conclude that challenging existing structural constraints is crucial to prevent a tokenistic use of the concept.

Contingent universality: The epistemic politics of global mental health.

The field of global mental health (GMH) has undergone profound changes over the past decade. Outgrowing its earlier agenda it has performed a reflexive turn, broadened towards a social paradigm and developed new modes of knowledge production, all of which reshaped 'mental health' as a global object of knowledge and care, and the epistemic politics of the field. Drawing on long-term ethnographic fieldwork among GMH experts and recent agenda-setting publications, I discuss how GMH advocates and critical observers alike have created conceptual and practical middle-grounds between different forms of mental health knowledge - across culture, epistemic power, lived experience, policy platforms and academic disciplines - framing their dynamic encounters as dialogue, adaptation, participation, co-production or integration. Ultimately, I argue, GMH today is focusing less on establishing mental health as a universal problem than on managing its inherent multiplicity through alignment and integration across different bodies of knowledge. Global knowledge, so conceived, is fluid and malleable and produced in open-ended knowledge practices, governed by what I call 'contingent universality'. It is not new that the concepts and practices of the psy-disciplines are malleable and multiple, internally and externally contested, rapidly changing over time and not easily transferrable across space. What is new is that within the increasingly heterogenous epistemic space of GMH, these features have become assets rather than liabilities. GMH knowledge achieves both global reach and local relevance precisely because 'mental health' can be many things; it can be expressed in a wide range of idioms and concepts, and its problems and solutions align easily with others, at many scales. These fluid and integrative knowledge practices call for renewed empirical, critical and collaborative engagement.

"Now, I have my baby so I don't go anywhere": A mixed method approach to the 'everyday' and young motherhood integrating qualitative interviews and passive digital data from mobile devices.

The impacts of early pregnancy and young motherhood on everyday life, including interpersonal and individual behavior, are not well-known. Passive digital sensing on mobile technology including smartphones and passive Bluetooth beacons can yield information such as geographic movement, physical activity, and mother-infant proximity to illuminate behavioral patterns of a mother's everyday in Nepal. We contribute to mixed-methods research by triangulating passive sensing data (GPS, accelerometry, Bluetooth proximity) with multiple forms of qualitative data to characterize behavioral patterns and experiences of young motherhood in the first year postpartum. We triangulated this digital information in a constant comparative analysis with in-depth interviews, daily diaries, and fieldnotes. We reveal typical behavioral patterns of rural young mothers and highlight opportunities for integrating this information to improve health and well-being.

Global Mental Health: Interdisciplinary challenges for a field in motion.

In recent years, efforts in Global Mental Health (GMH) have evolved alongside critical engagement with the field's claims and interventions. GMH has shifted its agenda and epistemological underpinnings, increased its evidence base, and joined other global policy platforms such as the Sustainable Development Goals. This editorial introduction to a thematic issue traces the recent shifts in the GMH agenda and discusses the changing construct of "mental health" as GMH moves away from a categorical biomedical model toward dimensional and transdiagnostic approaches and embraces digital technologies. We highlight persistent and emerging lines of inquiry and advocate for meaningful interdisciplinary engagement. Taken together, the articles in this special issue of Transcultural Psychiatry provide a snapshot of current interdisciplinary work in GMH that considers the socio-cultural and historical dimensions of mental health important and proposes reflexive development of interventions and implementation strategies.

Finding "What Works": Theory of Change, Contingent Universals, and Virtuous Failure in Global Mental Health.

Global Mental Health has developed interventions that strive to work across great difference-variously conceptualized as cultural, socio-economic, geographic, or pertaining to the characteristics of health systems. This article discusses how the evaluation framework Theory of Change (ToC) facilitates the production of 'global' knowledge across such differences. Drawing on 14 months of multi-sited fieldwork among Global Mental Health actors in Europe, North America and South Africa, it traces the differential use of ToC in GMH interventions. While much critical scholarship of Global Health metrics holds that techniques of quantification rely on universals that necessarily betray the "real world", ToC unsettles these critiques. It comes into view as an epistemic and relational device that produces 'contingent universals'-concepts that are true and measurable until they stop working in the field, or until the parameters of 'what works' shift to a new iteration. As such, Theory of Change produces actionable-rather than true-knowledge attuned to open-ended change, both desirable (impact) and unforeseen (adaptation). Its effects, however, are ambiguous. ToC presents us with a horizoning technique that enables what I call "virtuous failure" within the evidence-based paradigm. It may equally harbor the potential to disrupt distinctions such as bricolage (tinkering) and design (planning) and their respective politics, as it may tie neatly into audit cultures, depending on its use. The article analyzes the novel stakes of reflexive evaluation techniques and calls on anthropology and critical Global Health for renewed empirical engagement.

Postsocialism, the psy-ences and mental health.

Over the past decades, the formerly socialist countries of East Central Europe and Eurasia have experienced a range of transformations which bear directly upon the domains of mental health, psychiatry, and psychology. In particular, the disciplines and professions concerned with the human mind, brain, and behavior ("the psy-ences") were strongly affected by sociopolitical changes spanning the state-socialist and postsocialist periods. These disciplines' relationship to the state, their modes of knowledge production, and the epistemic order and subjectivities they contributed to have all undergone dramatic ruptures. In this essay, we trace the literature on these issues across three thematic domains: (a) history and memory; (b) the reform of psychiatry in an era of global mental health; and (c) therapy and self-fashioning. We argue for a closer articulation between the social science and historical literature on socialism and its "posts" and the literature among anthropologists, sociologists, and historians on the sciences of the mind and brain, and we suggest that each of these literatures helps to critically open up and enrich the other.