'Through a kaleidoscope': A Foucauldian discourse analysis of Belgian policy regarding patients with a migration background and depression in general practices.

Abstract

A higher prevalence of depression is found among patients with a migration background within the Belgian population. Nevertheless, this group is underrepresented in ambulant and residential mental health care services. Since general practitioners (GPs) have a crucial gatekeeping role, this led some researchers to investigate the possibility of a provider bias influencing GPs' assessment and referral of depressed patients with a migration background. However, GPs' accounts may be influenced by wider professional discourses present at the policy level, which are inevitably linked to institutions regulating the conduct of GPs. Therefore, this study applied a Foucauldian discourse analysis (a) to identify broader professional discourses in Belgian policy documents regarding patients with a migration background and depression in general practices, (b) to examine how patients with a migration background are discursively positioned and (c) to investigate which different balances of power in the relationship between GPs and patients with a migration background are demonstrated in the identified discourses. We identified three recurring discourses: (a) the othering discourse, (b) the health literacy discourse, and (c) the person-centred discourse. Our analysis demonstrated that the former two discourses illustrate the perpetuation of a biomedical discourse. While the last discourse is aligned with a counter-discourse associated with the person-centred care model in health care. Consequently, our analysis demonstrated the construction of a contradictory discursive framework throughout the various policy documents on which GPs might rely when speaking about patients with a migration background suffering from depression.