‘Effective’ at What? On Effective Intervention in Serious Mental IllnessHealth Care Analysis (2019)
The term “effective,” on its own, is honorific but vague. Interventions against serious mental illness may be “effective” at goals as diverse as reducing “apparent sadness” or providing housing. Underexamined use of “effective” and other success terms often obfuscates differences and incompatibilities in interventions, degrees of effectiveness, key omissions in effectiveness standards, and values involved in determining what counts as “effective.” Yet vague use of such success terms is common in the research, clinical, and policy realms, with consequences that negatively affect the care offered to individuals experiencing serious mental illness. A pragmatist-oriented solution to these problems suggests that when people use success terms, they need to explain and defend the goals and supporting values embedded in the terms, asking and answering the questions, “Effective at what? For whom? How effective? And why that goal?” Practical and epistemic standards for effectiveness will likely remain plural for good reasons, but each standard should be well explained and well justified.
- serious mental illness,
- clinical social work
Publication DateSpring March 20, 2019
Citation InformationSusan C. C. Hawthorne and Anne Williams-Wengerd. "‘Effective’ at What? On Effective Intervention in Serious Mental Illness" Health Care Analysis (2019) ISSN: 1573-3394
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/anne-williams-wengerd/1/