The (Stigma) Power of Discourse: How GPs Perpetuate and Resist Stigmatizing Patients With a Migration Background With Mental Health Issues

Abstract

Mental health issues, such as depression, are prevalent in Belgium, particularly among individuals with a migration background. General practitioners (GPs) may inadvertently contribute to these disparities through unconscious biases and stereotypes. This study investigates how Belgian GPs’ accounts reflect, perpetuate, or resist stigmatization toward patients with a migration background experiencing mental health issues and how these accounts are influenced by broader professional discourses. Theoretically, this paper is inspired by Imogen Tyler’s reconceptualization of stigma and her further development of “stigma power.” We conducted a critical discourse analysis guided by the principles of Norman Fairclough, analyzing 19 interviews with Dutch-speaking GPs in Belgium. Our findings reveal two main discourses in GPs’ accounts: (a) the health literacy discourse, resonating with the biomedical and biopsychosocial models, and (b) the person-centered discourse, resonating with the person-centered model. The discourses, embedded in institutional guidelines and policy regulations, function as “stigma machines,” perpetuating stigmatization of patients with a migration background in GPs’ accounts. However, the person-centered discourse also shows potential to counteract and resist stigmatization. This study underscores the importance of addressing both GPs’ professional accounts and broader professional discourses and power dynamics within the therapeutic relationship to effectively tackle ethnic disparities in mental health care. By examining how these power relations shape GPs’ professional accounts, we highlight the need for critical reflection on the role of institutional discourses in either perpetuating or challenging stigmatizing practices. This approach aims to contribute to more equitable mental health care for patients with a migration background.