Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Discourse & Society
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Halonen, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Life stories used as evidence for the diagnosis of addiction in group therapy

Mia Halonen

RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR THE LANGUAGES OF FINLAND

In this article I study how the life stories of patients are used as evidence in the diagnosis of addiction in Minnesota model group therapy. As part of this therapy, patients have to tell their life story, concentrating on their substance abuse. This story is used by the therapists as a means for getting patients to recognize and accept that they are addicts. For this purpose the therapists use intervening questions. This article concentrates on the placement and the structure of the patients’ responses to these interventions and the kinds of attitudes or standpoints the patients express. I will also discuss ways in which the theory of the Minnesota model informs the therapists’ actions by analysing the places within the patient's story where the therapists choose to intervene and the structure of their intervening turns. The data of the study consist of five 45-minute group therapy sessions and three multi-professional team meetings in a Finnish inpatient clinic. The therapists pose questions when the patient has said something that clearly hints at a symptom of addiction. The questions are designed as (disjunctive) yes/no questions which offer to the patient two alternative formulations of their talk to choose from. The first alternative hints at less problematic use of alcohol, and the latter, often an only implicit alternative, hints at more problematic consumption. This order offers to the patient an opportunity to choose the less problematic version in a preferred manner – if they are to display themselves as not having more problems with consumption than anyone else. The therapists can, then, use the patients’ responses to monitor how they have adopted the treatment and the diagnosis of addiction, that is, whether they are resistant or compliant.

Key Words: confirmation • confrontation • disjunctive and yes/no questions • evidence

Discourse & Society, Vol. 17, No. 3, 283-298 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/0957926506062358


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?