Community psychology in Portugal: evolution and current trends in praxis and research

Community Psychology in Portugal: Evolution and Current Trends in Praxis and Research Pedro M. Teixeira, Carlos M. Gonçalves & Isabel Menezes [Forum Gemeindepsychologie, Jg. 14 (2009), Ausgabe 2] Zusammenfassung Gemeindepsychologie in Portugal: Entwicklung und aktuelle Trends in Praxis und Forschung Pedro M. Teixeira, Carlos M. Gonçalves und Isabel Menezes beschreiben in ihrem Beitrag die Entwicklung der Gemeindepsychologie in Portugal und zeigen am Beispiel der Veränderungen in der Behindertenhilfe auf, dass Gemeindepsychologie auch politisch agieren muss, um ihre Ziele zu erreichen. Nach dem Ende der Diktatur im Jahr 1974 kam es zu einem dynamischen Ausbau der universitären Psychologie in Portugal: 1977 wurde Psychologie zu einem eigenständigen Studienfach und bereits 1981 wurde das erste gemeindepsychologische Projekt durchgeführt. Der Beitritt zur EU stärkte die Gemeindepsychologie. Neue Arbeitsfelder, jenseits der klinischen Psychologie wurden erschlossen und dank EU-fördermittel ausgebaut. Die in diesem Kontext entstandenen Projekte sind gekennzeichnet durch eine Sozialraumorientierung. In vielen Regionen wurden Community Centres (Gemeindezentren) gegründet. Hierdurch wurden Themen wie Inklusion und soziale Verortung in den Mittelpunkt psychologischen Handelns gerückt. Die sich in den Community Centres entwickelnden Inklusionsstrategien haben zwei Schwerpunkte: ersten aufzuzeigen, dass die Exkludierten nicht selbst an der Ausgrenzung schuld sind und zweitens darauf hinzuweisen und nachzuweisen wie eine verfehlte Sozialpolitik Ausgrenzungsprozesse verstärkt. In den Community Centres entwickelte sich auch die Förderung lokaler Ökonomie und Gründung entsprechender Unternehmen zu einem Aufgabenfeld der Gemeindepsychologie. Das europäische Veröffentlichungsblatt (EUR LEX) sowie eine überregionale portugiesische Tageszeitung (Portuguese Diário da República) wurden daraufhin analysiert, welchen Stellenwert Empowerment in den gesetzlichen Vorgaben und Politiken zum Umgang mit Menschen mit Behinderung hat. Die Analyse offenbart einen deutlichen Widerspruch zwischen dem Diskurs, der sich an Empowerment orientiert, und einer Praxis, für die dieses nicht gilt. Damit auch die Praxis sich mehr von der Idee des Empowerments leiten lässt, müsste sich - so das Ergebnis einer qualitativen Studie mit Fachkräften - Folgendes ändern: (1) Es bedarf einer Neudefinition der Expertenrolle. (2) Ein stärkerer Einbezug der Familien erscheint erforderlich, damit diese ihre Tendenz zur Überbehütung überwinden können und ihre Beziehung zu dem Familienmitglied mit Behinderung auf eine gleichberechtigte Basis stellen. (3) Menschen mit Behinderung sind intensiv an Hilfeentscheidungen zu beteiligen. (4) die Selbsthilfebewegung muss gestärkt werden und (5) die Gemeindepsychologinnen und Gemeindepsychologen müssen sich auch politisch einmischen. Schlüsselwörter: Gemeindepsychologie, Behinderung, Empowerment, Inklusion Summary This paper addresses the emergence, evolution and future perspective of community psychology in Portugal, a story that cannot be told unless we take into account the country's socio-political history of the last 35 years, including the transition to democracy (1974) and the entrance in the EEC (1985). Two trends will be discussed. The first relates to active community psychology at community centres, initiated by the civil society and strongly supported through European funds, and will highlight some examples of innovative practice of community psychology. The second relates to research and demonstrates how a political perspective is essential for community psychology, based on an example in the field of disability care. Key words: Portugal, Community centres, disability, inclusion The story of community psychology in Portugal (and certainly elsewhere) cannot be told unless we keep history in mind. Particularly, the fact that Portugal lived under a dictatorship during half the 20th century - a dictatorship that survived World War II, and maintained, by means of a prolonged armed conflict (1961-1974), the final colonial empire of the century. In this context, it is no surprise that during this period, the social sciences were regarded with suspicion and there was no institutional support for the development of psychology and other social sciences. As Madureira Pinto (1998) states in his analysis of the evolution of sociology, the kind of thought characteristic of the social sciences "was seen by the established repressive apparatus as an activity which potentially threatened state security, and therefore had to be watched, censored and repressed" (S. 59). Obviously, this distrustful attitude towards psychology was not exclusively Portuguese. Similarly, in Spain "a hard-right and conservative Weltanschauung substituted previous modernization and social reform [and] tried to transform psychology into a branch of scholastic philosophy, thereby denaturalizing its contents and impeding its development as a scientific discipline" (Carpintero, 2001, S. 380-381). It was not until 1968 that a university degree in psychology was created (within the Department of Philosophy), while independent departments of psychology at the major universities were established only in 1980 (Martin & López, 2007). Psychology, however, was also looked with suspicion in the former USSR and only after the fall of the regime was it re-introduced as a mandatory subject in Russian secondary schools, as a strategy to counteract the effects of a collectivist orientation in youth (Zabrodin, Popova & Minaev, 1998). So, in spite of the fact that critical psychology has justly denounced the role psychology as a discipline has played in naturalizing oppression (Albee, 1987, 1996, 2000; Albee, Joffe & Dusenbury, 1988; Montero, 2003; Nelson & Prilleltensky, 2005), it is quite interesting to note that in authoritarian regimes, psychology was seen as a menace and a challenge to the status quo in various parts of the globe. In Portugal, the extremely conservative nature of the regime prevented the institution of psychology and other social sciences as a university degree - curiously, its creation was previewed in the writing of a law-decree in 1968 but ultimately excluded from the final text (Ferreira Marques, 1994 in Pinto, 2000) - but it did not prevent teaching and research in psychology to develop in the context of the departments of humanities and medicine, first in connection with education and then clearly expanding to other topics (Borges, 1986; Viegas de Abreu, 2005). In fact, theoretical interest and research in psychology had evolved in relation to medicine and educational science since the 19th century (Abreu, 2005; Carpintero, 2001) - as in other European countries, Spain included - even without the institutionalization of the discipline. But only after the 1974 Carnation Revolution which restored democracy, "the political will, the development of the universities and a new sensitivity to social problems facilitated the establishment of initiatives for the creation of Psychology as a higher education degree" (Borges & Pinto, 1986, S. 2). Finally, in 19771, a university degree in psychology was created at public universities2, first in the context of the Departments of Humanities, but shortly after (1979) constituting autonomous Departments of Psychology and Educational Sciences at the three major state universities, after intense student protests (in the spirit of the participatory flavour of the period). The implications of this late institution were compensated by the fact that, after the restoration of democracy, many intellectuals who had been trained abroad returned to Portugal and allowed for a rapid development of the field . During the 80's and 90's psychology evolved from invisibility to a leading role in terms of public recognition - that might even be excessive, not only because by there are 10,000 psychology students in 33 different institutions, but also because: "psychologists are frequently used under compensatory legitimation strategies (Weiler, 1990) whenever a social crisis or a harmful event occurs, i.e. it looks like a positive sign of concern to assert that "a psychologist is on the way even if the problem is not going to be (or cannot be) solved" (Menezes, Teixeira & Fidalgo , 2007, S. 323). During this initial stage of development, the more traditional areas of psychology prevailed, but as early as 1981, Professor Bártolo Campos, from the University of Porto, led an action-research community project, supported by the Bernard Van Leer and Calouste Gulbenkian Foundations, on pre-school curriculum development and on in-service education of unqualified pre-school staff working in rural areas. The Projecto Alcácer (Campos, 1986, 1989) was the first project in Portugal where, under the vision of an ecological perspective (Bronfenbrenner, 1979), community psychology values and strategies are put into practice. Similar projects followed under the supervision of similarly orientated researchers from different universities (see Menezes, Teixeira & Fidalgo, 2007 for a review). It is fair to mention two of them. Professor Bairrão Ruivo from the University of Porto who was responsible for several projects in the field of early intervention; and Professor José Ornelas, from the Instituto Superior de Psicologia Aplicada (Higher Institute for Applied Psychology), which systematically advocated "community psychology" as a field and coordinated projects in mental health. These projects were for the most part under the influence of North-American authors and perspectives - a tendency that was in tune with other European countries, where North-American psychology was becoming a major source of influence. Curiously enough, Portugal's accession to the European Union (in fact, in the European Economic Community back in 1985) not only had the political significance of including the country in a community of democracies - opposed to the "proudly alone" motto of the dictatorship - but also had a momentous impact for the development of community psychology. The role of community centres in the promotion of social inclusion European programmes supported the emergence of new organizational forms for psychological, social and community intervention, which reinforced the theoretical perspective universities were already trying to further regarding psychologists' professionalism. In fact, it is very interesting to note that, in spite of the late establishment of psychology in Portugal, universities were, since the late eighties, very much in line with the international tendencies that stressed primary prevention (Albee, Joffe & Dusenbury, 1988; Blocher, 1987; Bond & Compas, 1989; Conyne, 1987; Hurrelman, Kaufmann & Losël, 1987), the ecological metaphor (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Kelly, 1987) and collaborative strategies such as consultation and teamwork (Blocher, 1987, Gallessich, 1982; Kelly, 1987; Oja & Smulyan, 1989). Portuguese universities also advocated a conception of psychological intervention beyond classical face to face strategies (i.e., counselling and psychotherapy), so that psychologists would assume a consultative role in multi-professional teams; primary prevention goals and an ecological and developmental perspective; and an expansion beyond traditional professional contexts (schools, hospitals, companies, etc.) (Campos, 1985; Costa & Menezes, 1991; Soares, 1991). It is therefore not surprising that, in the early nineties, many of the emerging community centres, local units created by initiative of the civil society and strong support from EU funds, were encouraged by universities, based on the belief that these centres "have the advantage of enjoying genuine community integration and, therefore, a larger capacity to work in unison with community problems and resources, becoming integrated projects in the social development of a given community" (Costa & Menezes, 1991, S. 79). These centres were frequently located in deprived neighbourhoods, address a very wide spectrum of community issues and focused on diverse groups including children, adolescents, adults and senior citizens (Costa & Menezes, 1991; Soares, 1991). Many of these centres were created across the country and played a major part in expanding psychological services to the general population, particularly those in disadvantaged situations, while at the same time expanding the way psychologists themselves conceived their role as professionals and their involvement with colleagues from other fields (Duarte, 1999). This also raised psychologists' awareness of the need to go beyond an intra-psychic view of the individual and, therefore, to include in their interventions an ecological perspective that considers social transformation and social inclusion as a condition for individual wellbeing. As a result, community psychology was a particularly attractive framework as it assumes the role of psychologists as agents of social change, working in collaborative partnerships with other professionals and community actors. The Gabinete de Atendimento à Família (GAF) is an example of such a community centre that is currently the largest in the North of Portugal. Created in 1994, the European Year of the Family, by a religious community, the Order of Carmelites, GAF is located in Viana do Castelo, a city of 40,000 inhabitants in the northwest of Portugal. Its initial goal was to provide a structure of support for families with high levels of poverty and social exclusion, through an inclusive and integrated service with a multidisciplinary team working at different levels: social, psychological, economical, labour, juridical, educative and cultural. As a result GAF, like most community centres in Portugal, assumes a multidisciplinary approach involving a team of 26 professionals from several disciplines (social workers, socio-cultural animators, community mediators, lawyers, nurses, designers, sociologists). Again like other centres, GAF addresses a variety of social issues such as additive behaviours, AIDS, delinquency, integration of former convicts, homelessness, immigrants, unemployment, family dysfunction, domestic violence and children at risk. Services include housing, meals, food and clothing banks, occupational ateliers, a shelter house, a street team, educational and support groups, individual counselling etc. The centre is organized into five areas of intervention: (i) community support, (ii) health and deviant behaviours, (iii) domestic violence prevention and intervention, (iv) child and family protection, and (v) social enterprises. An analysis of GAF discourse and praxis based on public documents and its webpage illuminates several distinctive trends. Firstly, the GAF places an emphasis on networking with community resources and institutions. In fact, community centres have introduced a new type of relationship in community action that involves strong institutional networks, even if most centres would agree that this is an unfinished agenda, as better coordination between public and private sectors are a constant demand. GAF has tried to mobilize community agents and resources by establishing a series of formal and informal partnerships with other institutions, and has developed an intense interaction with local, national and even international organizations. The second trend is the prominence of people's rights as citizens in the community and their empowerment to reclaim these rights, combined with the belief in people's right to be(come) autonomous and included in familial, social, professional and community terms. It is quite easy to assume a needs-based perspective when working with disenfranchised and excluded groups; it is more complex and demanding to affirm that more than stressing people's needs it is their rights that should be emphasized, and that are in jeopardy through their everyday experiences: In people's notions about everyday life circumstances many aspects are naturalized. We all do that in order to carry out our multiple daily tasks, thus creating habits. In doing so, we accept explanations and modes of understanding life that reinforce existing social and political interests and naturalize social exclusion and inequality (Montero, 2007, S. 524). The GAF assumption that social exclusion is not a personal issue or the victims' responsibility implies not only stating publicly that social policies frequently perpetuate the inequalities that generate exclusion, but also advocating the creation (and creating) of actual opportunities for access to citizenship by excluded people. Finally, the third is the option for the development of social enterprises, where GAF was clearly a pioneer, as community centres did not typically organize social enterprises. GAF has created "WashGaf" and "Oficinas" with the goal to professionally integrate people who were experiencing difficulties in finding a job, generally after having lived in the GAF's shelter, while offering services to the community. While it is recognized that these enterprises can have a powerful impact for the workers, as they constitute what the French would call entreprises d'insertion (Moulaert & Ailenei, 2005), their influence of generating social capital in the community itself has also been noted (Kay, 2006). This emphasis on social or solidarity economy gives both workers and the community an opportunity to exert their citizen right to opt for alternative "modes of organisation based on solidarity and reciprocity" (Moulaert & Ailenei, 2005, S. 2043) - and thus, intended or not, increasing the pluralism and diversity within the community itself. of the eugenic movement. Considering the effect that environmental constraints and labelling concepts have on peoples lives, the need for change in attitude towards human achievement and certain relational settings (e.g. educational, cultural, social…) becomes obvious in the interest of individual wellbeing. Questioning settings and their disabling 'normality' may be a key for prevention and promotion of human development and wellbeing. It also represents a challenge for innovative practices and research that requires an agenda aimed towards more social and political transformation. The road ahead: The need for a Political Community Psychology Psychology in Portugal struggled to affirm itself as a science and a profession - and successfully. But, in discussing the essential skills of community psychology, the last author recently stated that community intervention should be recognized as the skill of making politics by other means (Menezes, 2007), and therefore putting "psychological knowledge at the service of people who are oppressed, disempowered and excluded - thus assuming that community intervention is actively committed to personal well-being and social justice" (Coimbra & Menezes, in press). In fact, in spite of the extremely intense development of the field over the last three decades, psychology and community psychology are still failing to recognize their political responsibility in exposing discrimination, claiming for specific rights and generally affirming that equality requires the recognition (and valuing) of difference. It is now time to follow Martin-Baró's (1986) challenge, to turn community psychology into committed and engaged praxis and research, recognizing and exposing the pervasive effects of lack of power, oppression and discrimination and actively arguing that psychological well-being requires social and political transformation. References Abreu, M. Viegas de (2005). Sinopse de Sílvio Lima sobre "A Psicologia em Portugal" (1950): fontes para uma História da Psicologia Portuguesa. Iberpsicología: Revista: Revista Electrónica de la Federación española de Asociaciones de Psicología, 10, 5. Albee, G. (1987). Powerlessness, politics, and prevention. The communitymental health approach. In K. Hurrelman, F.-X. Kaufmann & F. Lösel (Eds.), Social intervention: Potential and constraints. S. Berlin: W. de Gruyter. Albee, G. W. (1996). Revolutions and counterrevolutions in prevention. American Psychologist, 51(11), 1130-1133. Albee, G. W. (2000). The Boulder model's fatal flaw. American Psychologist, 55(2), 247-248. Albee, G., Joffe, J. & Dusenbury (Eds.) (1988). Prevention, powerlessness and politics: Readings on social change. Newbury Park, New York: Sage Publications. Barnes, C. (1997). A Legacy of Oppression: A History of Disability in Western Culture. In L. Barton & M. Oliver (Eds.), Disability Studies: Past, Present and Future (pp. 3-24). Leeds: The Disability Press. Blocher, D. H. (1987). The professional counsellor. NewYork: MacMillan. Bond, L. & Compas, B. (Eds.) (1989). Primary prevention and promotion in the schools. Newbury Park, C.A.: Sage. Borges, I. P. (1986). História da Psicologia em Portugal (VII): Antecedentes das Faculdades de Psicologia e de Ciências da Educação. Jornal de Psicologia, 5, 1, 7-12. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Campos, B. P. (1985). Consulta psicológica e projectos de desenvolvimento humano. Cadernos de Consulta Psicológica, 1, 5-6. Campos, B. P. (1986). Formacion e investigacion-accion participativas para el desarrollo. In J. M. Quintana (ed.), Investigación Participativa e Educacion de Adultos (pp. 151-162). Madrid: Narcea. Campos, B. P. (1989). Questões de Política Educativa. Porto: Asa. Carpintero, H. (2001). The development of contemporary Spanish psychology. International Journal of Psychology, 36(6), 378-383. Coimbra, J. L. & Menezes, I. (in press). Society of individuals or community strength: Community psychology at risk in at risk societies. Journal of Critical Psychology Counselling and Psychotherapy. Conyne, R. K. (1987). Primary preventive counselling: Empowering people and systems. Muncie: Accelerated Development Inc. Costa, M. E. & Menezes, I. (1991). Consulta psicológica de adultos em centros comunitários. Cadernos de Consulta Psicológica, 7, 77-82. Davis, Lennard (2006). Constructing Normalcy The Bell Curve, the Novel, and the Invention of the Disabled Body in the Nineteenth Century. In L. Davis (Ed.), The Disability Studies Reader, 2nd Edition (pp. 3-16). Routledge. Gallessich, J. (1982). The profession and practice of consultation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Goodley, D. & Lawthom, R. (2005). Epistemological journeys in participatory action research: alliances between community psychology and disabilities studies. Disability & Society, 20 (2), 135151. Hahn, H. (1985). Toward a politics of disability: Definitions, disciplines, and policies. Social Science Journal, 22(4), 87-105. Hurrelman, K., Kaufmann, F.-X. & Lösel, F. (Eds.) (1987). Social intervention: Potential and constraints. Berlin: W. de Gruyter. Kay, A. (2006). Social capital, the social economy and community development. Community Development Journal, 41, 2, 160-173. Kelly, J. G. (1987). The ecology of prevention: illustrating mental health consultation. N.Y.: Haworth Press. Madureira Pinto, J. (1998). Sociology in Portugal. Formation and recent trends. In Ana Nunes de GruyterAlmeida (Ed.), Terra Nostra. Challenges, controversies and languages for Sociology and the Social Sciences for the 21st Century. Proceedings for the ISA Conference for the Lusophone World, Lisboa, Portugal, 1997 (pp. 57-65). Montréal: International Sociological Association. Martin, A. & López, J. S, (2007). Community psychology in Spain: Realities, expectations and desires. In S. Reich, M. Riemer, I. Prilleltensky & M. Montero (Eds.), International community psychology: History and theories (pp. 299-316). New York: Springer. Martin-Baró, I. (1986). Hacia una psicología de la liberación. Boletín de Psicología, 22, 219-231. Dowloaded at http://www.uca.edu.sv/deptos/psicologia/hacia.htm on 26 July 2006. Menezes, I., Teixeira, P. M. & Fidalgo, M. (2007). Community psychology in Portugal: From "revolution" to empowered citizenship. In S. Reich, M. Riemer, I. Prilleltensky & M. Montero (Eds.), International community psychology: History and theories (pp. 317-334). New York: Springer. Montero, M. (2003). Teoria y práctica de la psicología comunitaria. La tensión entre comunidad y sociedad. Buenos Aires: Paidos. Montero, M. (2007). The Political Psychology of Liberation: From Politics to Ethics and Back. Political Psychology, 28, 5, 517-533. Moulaert, F. & Ailenei, O. (2005). Social economy, third sector and solidarity relations: A conceptual synthesis from history to present. Urban Studies, 42, 11, 2037-2053. Nelson, G. & Prilleltensky, I. (Eds.) (2005). Community psychology: In pursuit of liberation and well-being. Palgrave/Macmillan. Oja, S. N. & Smulyan, L. (1989). Collaborative action research: A developmental approach. Sussex: The Falmer Press. Oliver, M. & Zarb, G. (1989). The Politics of Disability: a new approach. Disability, Handicap & Society, 4(3), 221-239. Pais, S. & Menezes, I. (in press). A experiência de vida de crianças e jovens com doença crónica e suas famílias: O papel das associações de apoio no seu empoderamento. Educação, Sociedade & Culturas. Pinto, A. C. (2002). Uma leitura comentada de dois artigos de J. Ferreira Marques sobre a psicologia em Portugal e uma reflexão sobre cenários futuros. In Homenagem ao Prof. Doutor J. Ferreira Marques (pp. 2338). Lisboa: Faculdade de Psicologia e de Ciências da Educação da Universidade de Lisboa. Schalock, R. (2004). The Emerging Disability Paradigm and Its Implications for Policy and Practice. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 14(4), 204215. Simeonsson, R., Leonardi, M., Lollar, D., Bjorck-Akesson, E., Hollenweger, J. & Martinuzzi, A. (2003). Applying the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) to measure childhood disability. Disability & Rehabilitation, 25(11/12), 602. Smart, J. & Smart, D. (2006). Models of Disability: Implications for the Counseling Profession. Journal of Counselling & Development, 84(1), 29-40. Soares, I. (1991). Consulta psicológica de jovens em centros comunitários. Cadernos de Consulta Psicológica, 7, 27-31. Teixeira, M. P., Loja, E., Costa, E. & Menezes, I. (accepted). Más allá del desierto: Empoderamiento e inclusión en las políticas sociales en el dominio de la rehabilitación en Portugal y en Europa. In A. Sanchez Vidal, J. Alfaro & Alba Zambrano (Eds.), Psicologia Comunitaria y Políticas Sociales. Vislie, L. (2003). From integration to inclusion: focusing global trends and changes in the western European societies. Eur. J. of Special Needs Education, 18, 1, 17-35. Zabrodin, Y., Popova, M. & Minaev, A. (1997). Affective education: a Russian perspective. In P. Lang, K. Yaacov & I. Menezes (Ed.), Affective Education: A Comparative View (pp. 46-57). Continuum International Publishing Group. Notes 1. This décalage (1974-1977) is understandable if we take into account that Portugal effectively experienced a revolution with the subsequent social convulsions. Universities were under great pressure to evolve. For instance, Porto University had 6 faculties until 1974 and 5 more were created in the 5 years following the revolution (Psychology and Education Sciences included). 2. Since 1962/64 psychology was an unofficial degree conferred by a private school, the Instituto Superior de Psicologia Aplicada (ISPA). 3. A situation, which mirrors that of Spain (Carpintero, 2001; Martin & López, 2007). Authors Pedro M. Teixeira, PhD Faculty of Psychology and Education, Porto University Rua do Dr. Manuel Pereira da Silva 4200-392 Porto Portugal [email protected] Carlos M. Gonçalves Gabinete de Atendimento à Família (GAF) Rua da Bandeira, 342 4900-561 VIANA DO CASTELO Portugal Phone: +351 22 258 829 138 Fax: +351 22 258 811 313 http://www.gaf.pt/ Isabel Menezes, PhD Associate Professor Faculty of Psychology and Education, Porto University Rua do Dr. Manuel Pereira da Silva 4200-392 Porto Portugal Phone: +351 22 6079775 Fax:+351 22 6979725