Within mental health services, the recovery model has been a guiding philosophy over the past decades. This model stresses ‘person-centred care’ and focuses on assisting service users to live a meaningful and hopeful life even if their illness has not been cured. As part of the recovery orientation, ‘peer workers’ (PWs), i.e. people with lived experiences of mental illness, are increasingly employed within mental health services. In this article, the authors explore how these changes open up frontiers and set in motion boundary work and identity discussions among healthcare professionals. Empirically, the article draws on qualitative data – interviews with healthcare professionals and observations of meetings – collected in mental healthcare services in Denmark. Theoretically, the article combines literature on professional boundary work with theories on ‘self-casting’, ‘alter-casting’ and ‘othering’. Analysing two sets of demarcations – those between healthcare professionals and PWs, and those between professionals and patients – the study shows how the recovery model leads to defensive boundary work as well as an opening up of boundaries.

Mental health services are increasingly employing peer workers (PWs), individuals who have lived experiences with mental health problems, to support patients and be part of mental health care teams. While the employment of PWs continues to increase, little is known about how the function unfolds in practice. This paper explores the broader context in which the PWs navigate and the concrete outcomes and everyday issues that exist at the individual level. Methodologically, the paper draws on 22 interviews with PWs employed in the mental health services in Denmark. Theoretically, it combines Lipsky's (1980) theory on street-level bureaucrats with sociological discussions concerning the lay-expert divide. The analysis shows that PWs experience both role ambiguity and goal uncertainty and that they use substantial discretion in determining the nature, amount and quality of their peer practices. This - combined with the PWs' diverse lived experiences - calls for a heterogeneous understanding of peer work and therefore the analysis presents three categories of peer workers: PWs as (1) a representative of patients' lifeworld, (2) an interdisciplinary professional and (3) an 'expert by experience'. These categories display PWs different enactments of their lived experiences and reveal ambiguities tied to the lay-expert divide.

Patient involvement is a prominent policy aim in modern health care. Today, mental health services employ peer workers (PWs) who have personal experiences with mental illness. Based on 22 interviews with PWs and 26 audio recordings of real-life consultations, we show how PWs talk about their personal experiences as professional qualifications. Furthermore, we demonstrate how in real-life encounters, PWs and patients convert personal experiences into a professional approach through an interactionist role play that balance PWs role as former patients and current professionals. Our analysis shows that PWs combine the personal pronoun 'I' (stressing that it is personal) with the indefinite pronoun 'one' (referring to generalised patient experiences) when they recount illness experiences. This convey that PWs engage with mental illness as both a personal and professional topic. In addition, the analysis shows that PWs (and patients) use professional clues to manifest PWs' positions as professionals. Overall, the article demonstrates that instead of focussing on authentic patient relationships, as previous research has done, it is beneficial to investigate peer work from a symbolic interactionist approach revealing how PWs and patients skilfully manoeuvre the contradictions embedded in the PWs' dual role as former patients and current professionals.

This article reports on the findings from a qualitative, longitudinal study on lay perceptions of opportunity structures among young adults in Denmark. Previous research suggests that people often underestimate the extent of inequality and that rising inequality aggravates misperceptions. Our study deepens the understanding of the multi-layered processes that form meritocratic beliefs, and it identifies key factors at the macro-, meso- and micro-level. A macro-level factor that proved influential was a cultural script revolving around the Danish lay concept, social arv [social inheritance]. At the meso level, the factor of reference groups in socio-economic heterogeneous schools was instrumental for formations of inequality perceptions, but in dissimilar ways depending on micro-level subjective factors. Overall, the participants viewed the free educational system in Denmark as part of a welfare system that equalises opportunity structures in principle, while the majority simultaneously exhibited a nuanced awareness of social forces negating meritocracy in practice.

This paper explores the social relations between inpatients in psychiatric wards. Combining Barker's (2002) concept of 'collective illness identity' with Nelson's (1993) concept of 'epistemological communities', I draw attention to the inpatients' collective identification and experiential knowledge. Through the analysis, three aspects of the inpatients' relationships are unfolded. First, how the inpatients, through bodily expressions and narrative accounts, construct a collective illness identity based on shared experiences of symptoms and suffering. Second, the ways in which the inpatients use their shared experiential knowledge to support one another and challenge the mental health professionals. Third, how the inpatients' reflections on the long-term potential of their relationships reveal a number of concerns related to their continuation. Centrally, the paper points to the potential and challenges that arise from the inpatients' relations to one another and their embeddedness in a specific time and space. Empirically, the paper draws on five months of participant observation conducted in two psychiatric wards in Denmark and interviews with 14 psychiatric patients.

Aim: This study examined the ways in which citizens who have self-identified as having problem drug use experienced welfare state encounters in Denmark and considered the findings in the context of the social investment paradigm. Methods: We conducted qualitative interviews with 106 Danish citizens who identified as having a problem drug use. The interviews were transcribed and coded in Nvivo to classify different types of welfare state encounters experiences. Results: Previous research has documented extensive prevalence of drug-related stigmatization in welfare state encounters; however, approximately two-thirds of the citizens in this study did not recount this kind of stigmatization as predominating. Three prevailing narratives were conveyed by these participants: (1) narratives describing encounters where welfare state authorities approached the participant as 'a whole person,' (2) narratives depicting encounters where the participants were submissive, and (3) narratives about welfare state authorities who discredited the significance of the participants' drug problems and imposed expectations considered unrealistic by the participants, e.g. expectations related to labor market performance. In the third type of encounter, participants experienced incongruence between their actual and virtual identities; not because problem drug use was granted master status but because their self-identified severe drug problems were downplayed by the welfare state authorities. Conclusion: Encountering welfare state authorities who downplayed the importance of drug problems gave rise to a form of stigmatization which we conceptualize as 'neo-stigmatization' to emphasize the contrast to drug related stigmatization where the importance of drug use is elevated to the point of master status. Neo-stigmatization emerges as politically productive in the context of the social investment paradigm that increasingly ties social worth to labor market value. Alleviating neo-stigmatization requires a political-economic framework that recognizes the value of citizens as not just workers but also caregivers and care receivers.

This paper focuses on the everyday lives of young people with a severe mental illness living temporarily at a social psychiatric housing facility in Denmark. In the paper we take a temporal approach to the analysis of this and we draw on Henri Lefebvre's work on rhythm analysis to investigate the differences between the rhythms of everyday life within the institution and the rhythms of what is perceived as the everyday life of ordinary' youth. We also show how digital technologies play a central part in these institutionalised everyday lives by creating connections as well as disruptions between different time-spaces. Centrally, we point to the positive and negative consequences this has for the young peoples' sense of self. Empirically, the paper is based on a four-month ethnographic fieldwork at the housing facility in 2014.