From domestication to imperial patronage: Deconstructing the biomedicalisation of occupational therapy

Occupational therapy knowledge emerged in the 19th century as reformist movements responded to the industrialisation of society and capitalist expansion. In the Global North, it was institutionalised by State apparatuses during the First and Second World Wars. Although biomedicine contributed to the rapid expansion and establishment of occupational therapy as a health discipline, its domestication by the biomedical model led to an overly regulated profession that betrays its reformist ideals. Drawing on the work of Deleuze and Guattari, our aim in this article is to deconstruct the biomedicalisation of occupational therapy and demonstrate how resistance to this process is critical for the future of this discipline. The use of arts and crafts in occupational therapy may be conceptualised as a ‘nomad science’ aesthetically resisting the domination of industrialism and medical reductionism. Through the war efforts, a coalition of progressive nurses, social workers, teachers, artisans and activists metamorphosed into occupational therapists. As it did with nursing, biomedicine proceeded to domesticate occupational therapy through a form of ‘imperial’ patronage subsequently embodied in the evidence-based movement. ‘Occupational’ jargon is widely used today and may be viewed as the product of a profession trying to establish itself as an autonomous discipline that imposes its own regime of truth. Given the symbolic violence underlying this patronage, the future of occupational therapy should not mean behaving according to biomedicine’s terms. As a discipline, occupational therapy must resist the appropriation of its ‘war machine’ and craft its own terms through the release of new creative energy.