Difference between revisions of "Kurri-Wahlstroem2001"
PaultenHave (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Katja Kurri; Jarl Wahlström; |Title=Dialogical Management of Morality in Domestic Violence Counselling |Tag(s)=EMCA; agency; conversati...") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|BibType=ARTICLE | |BibType=ARTICLE | ||
|Author(s)=Katja Kurri; Jarl Wahlström; | |Author(s)=Katja Kurri; Jarl Wahlström; | ||
| − | |Title=Dialogical | + | |Title=Dialogical management of morality in domestic violence counselling |
|Tag(s)=EMCA; agency; conversation; counselling; domestic violence; feminism; morality; | |Tag(s)=EMCA; agency; conversation; counselling; domestic violence; feminism; morality; | ||
|Key=Kurri-Wahlstroem2001 | |Key=Kurri-Wahlstroem2001 | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
|Volume=11 | |Volume=11 | ||
|Number=2 | |Number=2 | ||
| − | |Pages= | + | |Pages=187–208 |
| − | | | + | |URL=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0959353501011002009 |
| + | |DOI=10.1177/0959353501011002009 | ||
|Abstract=Moral issues have rarely been an explicit topic when family violence has been discussed in psychological literature. This article contributes to this topic through a detailed analysis of the transcripts of a counselling session on domestic violence, with special emphasis placed on how complex issues of morality are dialogically managed by the participants. It is shown that the morality of counselling is not explicit, but is constructed by various cautious and indirect conversational devices. In the analysed conversation it was possible for the counsellor to ‘prescribe’ a normative morality only if this was done indirectly and discreetly. The function of these various delicate discursive techniques was to avoid attributing to the client the notion of ‘weak agency’, which was regarded as morally undesirable. We argue that on a global level the discursive techniques in use functioned to reinstate the institution of counselling as a liberal practice that respects the client’s autonomy. It is argued that the morality of counselling is constructed so as to preserve the moral agency of a client, while at the same time ‘prescribing’ the ideal of a ‘good life’. The analysis draws attention to how the counsellor manages the tension between the notions of a good life, as constructed by normative and public ethics, and, on the other hand, the consideration of the client’s right to make her own decisions in her personal life, as advocated in recent discussions in the field of counselling on domestic violence. The implications for good practice are discussed. | |Abstract=Moral issues have rarely been an explicit topic when family violence has been discussed in psychological literature. This article contributes to this topic through a detailed analysis of the transcripts of a counselling session on domestic violence, with special emphasis placed on how complex issues of morality are dialogically managed by the participants. It is shown that the morality of counselling is not explicit, but is constructed by various cautious and indirect conversational devices. In the analysed conversation it was possible for the counsellor to ‘prescribe’ a normative morality only if this was done indirectly and discreetly. The function of these various delicate discursive techniques was to avoid attributing to the client the notion of ‘weak agency’, which was regarded as morally undesirable. We argue that on a global level the discursive techniques in use functioned to reinstate the institution of counselling as a liberal practice that respects the client’s autonomy. It is argued that the morality of counselling is constructed so as to preserve the moral agency of a client, while at the same time ‘prescribing’ the ideal of a ‘good life’. The analysis draws attention to how the counsellor manages the tension between the notions of a good life, as constructed by normative and public ethics, and, on the other hand, the consideration of the client’s right to make her own decisions in her personal life, as advocated in recent discussions in the field of counselling on domestic violence. The implications for good practice are discussed. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 00:59, 19 October 2019
| Kurri-Wahlstroem2001 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Kurri-Wahlstroem2001 |
| Author(s) | Katja Kurri, Jarl Wahlström |
| Title | Dialogical management of morality in domestic violence counselling |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, agency, conversation, counselling, domestic violence, feminism, morality |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2001 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Feminism & Psychology |
| Volume | 11 |
| Number | 2 |
| Pages | 187–208 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1177/0959353501011002009 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
Moral issues have rarely been an explicit topic when family violence has been discussed in psychological literature. This article contributes to this topic through a detailed analysis of the transcripts of a counselling session on domestic violence, with special emphasis placed on how complex issues of morality are dialogically managed by the participants. It is shown that the morality of counselling is not explicit, but is constructed by various cautious and indirect conversational devices. In the analysed conversation it was possible for the counsellor to ‘prescribe’ a normative morality only if this was done indirectly and discreetly. The function of these various delicate discursive techniques was to avoid attributing to the client the notion of ‘weak agency’, which was regarded as morally undesirable. We argue that on a global level the discursive techniques in use functioned to reinstate the institution of counselling as a liberal practice that respects the client’s autonomy. It is argued that the morality of counselling is constructed so as to preserve the moral agency of a client, while at the same time ‘prescribing’ the ideal of a ‘good life’. The analysis draws attention to how the counsellor manages the tension between the notions of a good life, as constructed by normative and public ethics, and, on the other hand, the consideration of the client’s right to make her own decisions in her personal life, as advocated in recent discussions in the field of counselling on domestic violence. The implications for good practice are discussed.
Notes
