Chronic pain rehabilitation programs are aimed at helping patients to increase their functioning despite being in pain, thereby improving their quality of life. However, conversations between patients and practitioners about how the patient could deal with his/her pain and pain-related disabilities in a different way can be interactionally challenging. This study adopts a discursive psychological perspective to explore how pain-related disability is negotiated by patients and practitioners during consultations. The analysis shows that pain-related disability is treated by both patients and practitioners as negotiable rather than a fixed reality. Moreover, it shows that patients’ and practitioners’ negotiations of disability are subject to issues of agency, accountability, and blame, and it provides insight into the interactional dilemmas that are at stake, both for patients and practitioners. Revalidatieprogramma’s voor patiënten met chronische pijn zijn gericht op het verbeteren van het functioneren ondanks de pijn, waardoor kwaliteit van leven wordt bevorderd. Conversaties tussen patiënten en behandelaars over de manier waarop de patiënt kan omgaan met de pijn en gerelateerde beperkingen kunnen interactionele uitdagingen met zich meebrengen. Dit hoofdstuk verkent vanuit discursief-psychologisch perspectief hoe beperkingen worden onderhandeld door patiënten en behandelaars in consulten. De analyse toont aan dat de beperkingen worden behandeld als onderhandelbaar in plaats van als een onveranderbare werkelijkheid. Bovendien toont de analyse dat in deze onderhandelingen bepaalde issues relevant worden gemaakt, zoals ‘agency’, verantwoordelijkheid en schuld. Inzicht wordt geboden in de interactionele dilemma’s die op het spel staan voor zowel patiënten als behandelaars.
Analyses a number of climate negotiation records at the highest political level (country commitments), as well as at more technical negotiation levels (working out technical modalities).Offers readers essential insights into the factors that influence the success and failure of climate negotiations.Highlights the importance of flexibility and tactical maneouvers during the negotiation process.
This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in INTERNATIONAL SPECTATOR on 31-01-2022, available online: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03932729.2021.2007610 In July 2015, after intense negotiations with its creditors, Greece received a bailout in exchange for fiscal restraint. The coalition government at that time, led by the left-wing SYRIZA party, elected on the basis of an anti-austerity platform, eventually accepted the prevalent austerity frames of the creditors. Through the aid of Q-method, an analysis of Greek opinion leaders’ views of the negotiation highlights that this outcome can be explained in two different ways. The first posits that the ideological overtones that ruling SYRIZA injected in its negotiation strategy exhibited a lack of socialisation and undermined Greece’s already weak bargaining position. The second focuses on the institutional status quo bias in the Eurogroup in Germany’s favour, which discourages any change in the Eurozone. These two views may have partly been influenced by questions of political accountability.
MULTIFILE
