Am I a researcher or a self-harmer? Mental health, objectivity and identity politics in history

The different models of self-harm in other eras can challenge the presumed universality of modern concepts, from psychiatric diagnoses to the very idea of objectivity in science and medicine. In this paper I argue that the history of psychiatry is not a neutral set of ideas by which we understand the past but an opportunity to reflect on, critique and improve modern mental healthcare. By writing as omniscient narrators of the past, historians often do create the impression that there is only one interpretation of a set of ideas. Incorporating personal material into a narrative is one way of countering this tendency, reminding the reader that the researcher is a part of his or her field of research. Yet there are challenges here as well. In identifying as a particular kind of person—a mental health service user—we run the risk of narrowing the field. By exploring the tensions between research and experience, I highlight the importance of critical reflection on identity politics within mental health care and practice today.