Institute for Social Sciences in the 21st Century Visiting Fulbright Scholar
Thu, 3 May 2012
|
Professor David Cohen Stempel College of Public Health and Social Work, Florida International University (currently Fulbright-Tocqueville Distinguished Chair and visiting Fulbright professor at the Department of Psychology of University of Poitiers) will present a seminar to staff and research students on 3rd May from 11:00-1:00 in ORB 123
Researching against the mainstream in the health and social sciences: can one be critical and credible? |
 |
In the evening of 3rd May 2012 Professor Cohen will give a public lecture from 6:00-8:00 in Boole II lecture theatre.
'Who is an Expert in ADHD?'
Biography:
Prof. David Cohen is professor at the Stempel College of Public Health and Social Work of Florida International University, in Miami, where he teaches courses in psychopathology and psychopharmacology. He worked as a clinical social worker, obtained a PhD in Social Welfare from Berkeley, and was professor at University of Montreal. He has led over 30 research projects in the U.S., Canada, and France. His clinical work has long focused on clients' self-management of psychiatric medication and self-help strategies to cease taking such medication. He received the Eliott Freidson Award from the American Sociological Association for outstanding publication in medical sociology, the Times Educational Supplement Award for Best Academic Book, and the Distinguished Researcher Award for ethical and humane continuing educational work from the International Society for Ethical Psychology and Psychiatry. He authored or co-authored Challenging the Therapeutic State (1990), Médicalisation et contrôle social (1993), Guide critique des médicaments de l'âme (1995), Your Drug May Be Your Problem (1999 et 2007), Critical New Perspectives on ADHD (2006), and the forthcoming, Mad Science: Psychiatric Coercion, Diagnosis and Drugs in America. David Cohen works to develop lines of critical thought as alternatives to biological psychiatry, especially mainstream notions of efficacy and safety of psychiatric medications. Awarded the 2011-2012 Fulbright-Tocqueville Chair, he is currently visiting professor at the Department of Psychology of University of Poitiers.
Paper abstracts.
Research Seminar: 3rd May 11:00-1:00 in ORB 123
Researching against the mainstream in the health and social sciences: can one be critical and credible?
Abstract: Researchers in the health and social sciences sometimes construct research problems whose possible resolution translates as a head-on challenge to established beliefs and practices. Merely proposing a different definition for a situation or a phenomenon may set a researcher against the mainstream and lead to temporary exclusion and devalued credibility, or worse. Credibility, however, is about believing something or someone even though that something or that someone's claim might not be true, whereas science, as Popper taught us, is about devising tests for even the most incredible notions in an effort to get as close to truth as possible. Moreover, where no rigorous tests are available or possible, and rationality is the only guide, as in most social sciences, a 'critical attitude' is not only desirable but probably essential. Being 'credible' or believable only has sense in relation to a social group, whereas being 'critical' may be truly the stuff of research, regardless of its social consequences. Thus, a fortunate researcher might be critical and credible (the latter being of little scientific import but necessary to gain a measure of social standing) -- but only if she consistently chooses to be 'incredibly' critical.
Public Lecture: 3rd May 6:00-8:00 in Boole II lecture theatre
'Who is an Expert in ADHD?'
Abstract: What 'ADHD' is or might be, how ADHD is determined to be present in an individual, and what are the consequences of 'having' ADHD, remain debated to this day and contradictory opinions on these matters readily exist. More than 40 years after the start of psychostimulant prescriptions to 'hyperactive' children in the US and more than 30 years after the appearance of ADHD in psychiatric diagnostic manuals, is the reality of ADHD still only in the eye of the beholder? Prof Cohen proposes to examine the issue of expertise about human (children's) behavior, by asking: Who 'owns' the problem of ADHD? Who should be qualified to make judgments about whether children's behaviors are symptoms of a mental disorder? How valid are the criteria by which such judgments are usually made? Should any opinion about ADHD have precedence over any other opinion?
<<Previous Item||Next Item>>
