Desvinculação moral e desumanização na defesa do eletrochoque: Uma análise crítica das “evidências científicas”

Albert Bandura’s theory of moral disengagement (1999) allows us to analyze various mechanisms through which the lives of people considered “mad” are dehumanized and devalued. In this article, we have explored mechanisms of moral disengagement in professional arguments that defend the use of electroshock. Following Bandura, we analyzed recently published pro-electroshock articles and identified these mechanisms in their rhetoric of scientific evidence, which we divided into six categories: 1) moral justification; 2) euphemistic language and technicization; 3) advantageous comparison; 4) shifting and diffusion of responsibility; 5) minimization of consequences; 6) dehumanization and attribution of blame. We conclude with a reflection/invitation to consider “urgency” in mental health not as synonymous with coercive or potentially harmful intervention, but in the sense that an immediate and profound paradigm shift is necessary at the epistemological and material levels, toward the dignification of lives considered mad.