Epistemic injustice during the diagnostic process in psychiatry- a change in narrative

Abstract

This thesis critically examines the diagnostic process by subdividing this process into three separate components: i) patient testimony, ii) observation and conclusion of the diagnostician, and iii) diagnostic criteria. This subdivision aids in accurately identifying epistemic injustice in these components when a more general approach may fall short. The individual relationship between patient and diagnostician is analyzed, establishing the imbalance in power dynamics in this relationship as a significant contributor to the harmful effects of epistemic injustice during the diagnostic process. I argue for increased power of decision to patients to solve epistemic injustice on a structural level.