Critical Health Psychology, Pluralism and Dilemmas: The Importance of Being Critical.

Abstract

Hepworth (this issue) argues for critical health psychology (CHP) to move on from binary opposition to mainstream health psychology (MHP) and to engage with other researchers in projects of common interest. In doing so, CHP can take up Murray and Campbell's earlier 'call to action' and avoid the risk of isolation. However neither action nor cross-subject collaboration are necessarily appropriate strategies for all elements of a pluralistic CHP that encompasses a diversity of epistemological positions. Conducting research on others' terms also holds risks for the development of work that remains critical. The potential contributions of a pluralistic CHP, by way of action or otherwise, might usefully be judged in relation to both the distal and proximate contexts of health issues.