Stigma, recovery and rights-based care — structured clinical viva

This viva tests whether the candidate can speak multi-level social psychiatry: stigma mechanisms, recovery constructs, partnership processes, and human-rights language without legal fabrication or under-treatment ideology.[1][3][7]

Stigma. Define public vs self vs structural vs courtesy stigma; stereotype–prejudice–discrimination pathway; stigma as a fundamental cause of health inequality (resource restriction across jobs, housing, care quality). Note biogenetic messaging can increase social distance.[1][2]

Recovery. Distinguish clinical, functional, and personal recovery. CHIME: Connectedness, Hope, Identity, Meaning, Empowerment. Recovery is non-linear. Recovery-oriented practice: hope, partnership, strengths, community inclusion, peer involvement. Name abuses: KPI-driven premature discharge, denial of evidence-based care as "empowerment", token peer roles.[3][4]

Anti-stigma evidence. Protest, education, contact — contact-based approaches have strongest synthesis evidence among common strategies; education alone weaker; avoid fear-based campaigns.[5]

SDM and rights. SDM is three-talk partnership, not a form. Rights-based care: dignity, least restrictive means, non-discrimination, support for legal capacity/decision support. CRPD Article 12 debates: will-and-preferences vs capacity/best-interests frameworks; Freeman critique of absolute readings of General Comment; Szmukler on MH law/CRPD interface. Local statutes remain jurisdiction-specific — principles only, no invented sections. Rights-based care does not cancel risk assessment for imminent harm.[6][7]