Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2023 Jul 11:14:1173591.
doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1173591. eCollection 2023.

A conceptual framework for culturally appropriate advocacy with racialised groups

Affiliations
Review

A conceptual framework for culturally appropriate advocacy with racialised groups

Anthony Salla et al. Front Psychiatry. .

Abstract

Independent mental health advocacy was introduced in England to protect and promote the rights of people detained under mental health legislation. However, shortcomings in access and delivery to racialised people, raising concerns about equity, were identified by a review of the Mental Health Act. The development of culturally appropriate advocacy was recommended. While the term culturally appropriate may be taken for granted it is poorly defined and limited efforts have conceptualized it in relation to advocacy. Ideally, advocacy operates as a liberatory practice to challenge epistemic injustice, which people experiencing poor mental health are at acute risk of. This is amplified for people from racialised communities through systemic racism. This paper argues that advocacy and culturally appropriate practices are especially relevant to racialised people. It clarifies the importance of culture, race and racism to the role of advocacy, and understanding advocacy through the conceptual lens of epistemic injustice. A central aim of the paper is to draw on and appraise cultural competency models to develop a conceptual framing of cultural appropriate advocacy to promote epistemic justice.

Keywords: advocacy; culturally appropriate; epistemic injustice; ethnicity; independent mental health advocacy; mental health legislation; race; social justice.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Keating F, Robertson D, Francis E, McCulloch A. Breaking the circles of fear. A review of the relationship between mental health services and African and African Caribbean communities. London: Sainsbury Centre for Mental Health; (2001).
    1. Newbigging K, Ridley J, McKeown M, Machin K, Poursanidou K. When you haven’t got much of a voice’: an evaluation of the quality of independent mental health advocate (IMHA) services in England. Health Soc Care Community. (2015) 23:313–24. doi: 10.1111/hsc.12153 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Newbigging K, Ridley J, McKeown M, Machin K, Poursanidou K, Able L, et al. . The Right to Be Heard: Review of the Quality of Independent Mental Health Advocate (IMHA) Services in England. Preston: University of Central Lancashire, (2012).
    1. HM Government . Independent review of the mental health act 1983: Supporting documents. (2019). Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa... (Accessed Feb 21, 2023).
    1. Salla A., Newbigging KA, Costello B. Culturally appropriate advocacy: a scoping report. Unpublished report for the Department of Health and Social Care. (2020).

LinkOut - more resources