Advertisement

When Assistance Is Not Given: Disaffiliative Responses to Therapeutic Community Clients’ Implicit Requests

  • Marco Pino
Chapter

Abstract

Therapeutic Communities (TCs) are residential rehabilitation services for people with diagnoses of mental illness (Campling, 2001). TCs are programmat-ically removed from hospitals; they are set up in home-like settings; and they host a relatively small number of clients. Clients are expected to be actively involved in the practical management of the house by sharing responsibilities with the staff (such as cooking, cleaning, and the like) hierarchical demarcation between staff and clients is expected to be reduced compared to more traditional mental health institutions (Campling, 2001). TC clients also enjoy more freedom than in more traditional mental health institutions (e.g. hospital wards), particularly by being allowed to exit the TC unaccompanied, having a job, taking part in free-time activities, and entertaining relationships outside the TC. This is unlike psychiatric hospitals, particularly forensic-care hospitals, where patients have little free movement (Bone & Marchant, Chapter 23, this volume; Dobbinson, Chapter 22, this volume).

Keywords

Staff Member Therapeutic Community Conversation Analysis Healthcare Assistant Explicit Request 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Campling, P. (2001). Therapeutic communities. Advances in Psychiatric Treatment, 7, 365–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Clayman, S. E., & Heritage, J. (2014). Benefactors and beneficiaries: Benefactive status and stance in the management of offers and requests. In P. Drew & E. Couper-Kuhlen (Eds.), Requesting in social interaction (pp. 55–86). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
  3. Couper-Kuhlen, E. (2014). What does grammar tell us about action? Pragmatics, 24, 623–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Curl, T. S. (2006). Offers of assistance: Constraints on syntactic design. Journal of Pragmatics, 38, 1257–1280. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2005.09.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Curl, T. S., & Drew, P. (2008). Contingency and action: A comparison of two forms of requesting. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 41, 129–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gill, V. T. (2005). Patient ‘demand’ for medical interventions: Exerting pressure for an offer in a primary care clinic visit. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 38, 451–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hepburn, A., & Bolden, G. B. (2013). The conversation analytic approach to transcription. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), The Handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 57–76). Boston: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  8. Kendrick, K., & Drew, P. (2014). The putative preference for offers over requests. In P. Drew & E. Couper-Kuhlen (Eds.), Requesting in social interaction (pp. 83–110). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
  9. Koshik, I. (2003). Wh-questions used as challenges. Discourse Studies, 5, 51–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Mortari, L., & Pino, M. (2014). Conversational pursuit of medication compliance in a therapeutic community for persons diagnosed with mental disorders. Disability and Rehabilitation, 36, 1419–1430. doi:10.3109/09638288.2013.834987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Rossano, F. (2010). Questioning and responding in Italian. Journal of Pragmatics, 42, 2756–2771. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2010.04.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Rossi, G. (2012). Bilateral and unilateral requests: The use of imperatives and Mi X? Interrogatives in Italian. Discourse Processes, 49, 426–458. doi:10.1080/0163853X.2012. 684136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Sidnell, J., & Stivers, T. (Eds.) (2013). Handbook of conversation analysis. Boston: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  15. Stevanovic, M. (2011). Participants’ deontic rights and action formation: The case of declarative requests for action. InList, 52. Retrieved at: www.inlist.uni-bayreuth.de/
  16. Stivers, T. (2008). Stance, alignment, and affiliation during storytelling: When nodding is a token of affiliation. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 41, 31–57. doi:10.1080/08351810701691123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Recommended reading

  1. • Gill, V. (2005). Patient ‘demand’ for medical interventions: Exerting pressure for an offer in a primary care clinic visit. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 38, 451–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. • Robinson, J. (2001). Asymmetry in action: Sequential resources in the negotiation of a prescription request. Text, 21, 19–54.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Marco Pino 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marco Pino

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations