The Concept of Oppression and Occupational Therapy: A Critical Interpretive Synthesis.
Elizabeth A Pooley, Brenda L Beagan
PMID 34726107WHAT IT FOUND
Across 28 occupational therapy and occupational science articles, oppression appeared as microaggressions, invisibility, fear of violence, structural constraints, and constrained choices.
Therapists, clients, and colleagues were described as affected, and the profession was not immune.
Key findings
01Everyday doing was described as hindered by microaggressions, invisibility, and violence, while occupational constraints were rooted in structural and institutional power relations and dominant ideologies.
02People responded to or resisted oppression through agency within constrained choices, and this could be stressful.
03Occupational therapy was described as not immune from perpetuating oppression, with ableism, ageism, colonialism, racism, and sexism affecting clients, therapists, and students.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
It synthesised published articles rather than observing patients or testing a therapy, so it cannot show that naming oppression changes occupational performance, access, or well-being. Only peer-reviewed English articles were included, and the search relied on terms such as racism and ableism, so work using other language, non-English sources, or conference material may be missed. The final sample was small and selected by interpretive judgement: 25 articles were chosen from 73 after exclusions, and 3 more were added for saturation. The databases used are described as biased toward Western/Northern journals and may favour quantitative constructs over social concepts. The authors state that their own positionality shaped the analysis. Actual changes described in the included articles were relatively small, so the paper maps concepts and recommendations more than it demonstrates implemented practice change.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read this as evidence that naming oppression improves patient care. It synthesises 28 articles and reports themes, not a tested intervention.