Eu já perdi muita coisa, minha família principalmente : um estudo psicossocial sobre duas políticas de desinstitucionalização do adolescente.

Abstract

This study sought to identify the meanings of the deinstitutionalization of the adolescent that underlie the politics of mental health and educative-partner system (SINASE) in State of Tocantins. The concept of deinstitutionalization of the adolescent was grounded in the proposals contained in two policies: Psychiatric Reform (Law 10.216, 2001), and SINASE (Law 12.594, of 2012). Both have as a guideline the guarantee of the family coexistence and the institutionalization as a last interventional chance that be brief (exceptionality and brevity of institutionalization). In parallel, these two policies have as history the consolidation of coercive measures, where adolescents authors of offenses or who have needs for interventions in mental health are removed from the community and family life as a treatment strategy. For this study was done the clipping of mental health care for drug addiction, so the focus was to understand what are the meanings of deinstitutionalization of teen author of offenses or who needs health care due to the use of alcohol and other drugs that have permeated the implementation of Psychiatric Reform and SINASE in the State of Tocantins. This study is a qualitative approach, the perspective of Socio-Historical Theory of Vigotski, grounded in dialectical and historical materialism. Participated in this study judges; prosecutors; public defender; professors of psychology and law courses; professionals working in the educative-partner system units and Psychosocial Care Center Alcohol and Drugs (CAPSad); incarcerated adolescents in educative-partner system and their mothers, adolescent in treatment at CAPSad Palmas, Tocantins, and their mothers. In all, 18 people participated in this study. All were interviewed individually, having a preestablished script. Was also performed research in documents, to support the analysis (charts of adolescents, official documents of the units in which adolescents were tied). The speeches analysis was performed from the systematization of information into three groups: Operators of Law, Professional Performers (including university professors), and the Object of the Act (the adolescents and their mothers). From the meaning nuclei seized, we sought to understand the meanings that each participant (respecting the place where the lines appear) attributed to deinstitutionalization proposed by both policies targeted of this study. In this study, we sought to defend the following thesis: the meanings are marked by authoritarian state intervention on the condition of poor teenage, reproducing the practices of institutionalization and social invisibility of poor teen author of offenses or who have health needs due to the use of crack, alcohol and other drugs. We conclude that the two policies are not yet consolidated and, on that basis, the practices still set based on individual and personalist intervention models, in which the logic of institutionalization of poor adolescents as a treatment strategy still prevails, and paradoxically, separation from families and impossibilities of these agents of mediation become effective in the development of adolescents.