Chapter 4: Negotiating (Dis)ability in the Context of Chronic Pain Rehabilitation: Challenges for Patients and Practitioners
This chapter uses Discursive Psychology to show that pain-related disability isn't a fixed physical state—it's actively negotiated through conversation. Patients construct themselves as "willing but unable," contrasting mental willingness with bodily limitations to prove their pain is real while avoiding blame for inactivity. Practitioners challenge this by suggesting behavioral changes and attributing agency, which risks triggering defensive responses and circular arguments. The analysis reveals how both parties navigate a delicate balance: patients must demonstrate both authentic suffering and motivation to change to gain treatment access.
0
1
Tags
Disability Studies
Social Science
Empirical Science
Science
Related
Chapter 1: Introducing Discursive Psychology as Methodology to Understand Disability
Chapter 2: Problematizing the Binary: A Poststructural Understanding of Dis/Ability in Schools
Chapter 3: Exploring the Rhetoric of ‘Burden’
Chapter 4: Negotiating (Dis)ability in the Context of Chronic Pain Rehabilitation: Challenges for Patients and Practitioners
Chapter 5: The Discursive Construction of Severe Dis/Ability in One School in the Southeastern United States
Chapter 6: It’s About Time - Constructing Dyslexia in Higher Education
Chapter 7: Formulating (Dis)Ability
Chapter 8: Intersections of Discursive Psychology and Disability Studies
Chapter 9: Using Discursive Psychology (DP) in Special Education & Mental Health
Chapter 10 - Engaging Disability Studies (DS) & Discursive Psychology (DP)
Learn After
The Conceptual Foundation: Disability as discursively negotiated reality
Patient-Practitioner Dynamics: The interactional dance between competing goals and perspectives
Methodology: How DP analyzes talk to reveal social actions
Clinical Implications: Understanding patterns to improve communication practices
Core Tension: Ability vs. Inability - The central discursive battleground of pain rehabilitation consultations
Evidence from Reviewed Chapters
Critique of Current Research