Introduction

The relationship between distress and disability has continued to be a vexed and controversial one at all levels. This was helpfully illustrated by the Lancaster University seminar and the follow-up report, which led to this publication. These tensions are also embodied in their different conceptualisations, internal and external definitions, cultures and movements. For some time it has even seemed that there might be an impasse in relationships between distress and disability because of the clear lack of consensus among mental health service users/survivors about the issues involved. There has also rightly been a reluctance to ignore or override conflicting views because of the damage it could do to survivors individually and collectively. It has sometimes seemed that there might be insurmountable difficulties in the way of developing increased understanding, solidarity and unity between survivors and disabled people's movements (as well as individuals), undermining either or both of them through trying to impose some kind of uniformity and common framework.

Recently, however, in this author's view, there have been developments which may offer a way past the roadblock that there has seemed to be between disability and distress; between disabled people and mental health service users/disabled people's movements and mental health service user/survivor movements. They relate to a flurry of new, emerging, exciting and important discussions which are taking place associated with both neurodiversity and mad studies, which this book also itself reflects. In this chapter, I will seek to explore some of the historic issues that have related to the state of the relationship between disability and distress and also consider the implications of such more recent and current developments.

Disability and distress: links and differences

To begin with, I need to make my own position clear. I write as a mental health service user/survivor and academic who has been actively involved for a long time in survivor organisations and the psychiatric system survivor movement. This began with Survivors Speak Out and Mind Link and has embraced other survivor liberatory and research organisations since. I have also engaged with and been involved with the disabled people's movement and formed links and relationships with people actively involved in it. Some of the survivors I have known and been close to over the years have also been people with physical and sensory impairments.