Ethical implications of defining longstanding anorexia nervosa.

The label severe and enduring anorexia nervosa (SE-AN) is widely used in the literature on longstanding anorexia nervosa (AN). However, the process of constructing the criteria and the use of the label SE-AN has ethical implications that have not been taken into account. Through combining existing literature and lived experience perspective, this paper addresses to what extent the current criteria do and do not reflect the lived experience. Arguments are presented on why the process of constructing the criteria for SE-AN and the application of the label can be both identified as, and give rise to, epistemic injustice. Epistemic injustice is an injustice that is done to a person as an individual with the capacity of acquiring and sharing knowledge. This type of injustice can occur at any stage of an interaction between people in which knowledge is shared with one another. The paper concludes by giving suggestions on how to pursue epistemic justice in the process of defining longstanding AN. Plain English summary: Some patients with anorexia nervosa (AN) develop a longstanding eating disorder. Over the years different labels, such as 'chronic AN' or 'treatment resistant AN', have been used to describe longstanding AN. Currently, the label that is used most often in scientific literature is 'severe and enduring AN' (SE-AN) and criteria for what entails SE-AN have been proposed. This paper looks at the possible ethical issues that have arisen in the process of constructing the criteria and possible ethical problems that may result from using the label SE-AN. The paper focuses on injustice that may arise when people with specific experiences, such as lived experience of longstanding AN, are not acknowledged as people with important knowledge to share. The paper concludes by giving suggestions on how to overcome this type of injustice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]