Transversalizing Care: Mutual Aid Groups and the Emergence of Mental Health Subjectivities

Although their use has been proposed for several decades as a fundamental part of mental health recovery, in recent years there has been an increasing push to integrate mutual aid groups (MAGs) into health services. While this integration could strengthen them, it risks transforming MAGs from alternatives to mere complements to psychiatric services. This article argues that the integration of mutual aid into formal health systems must be approached with caution, ensuring that such inclusion does not neutralize their transformative potential, but rather reorients care systems toward ontological pluralism, justice and epistemic dignity. To answer this question, a dialogue is proposed between theory and several programs where MAGs were the central strategy. Transversalizing care implies recognizing that different forms of healing arise from distinct worlds, logics, and ways of experiencing suffering. Without this shift, MAGs risk being neutralized, depoliticized, and absorbed by recovery systems that do not always respond to diverse forms of psychosocial suffering. The question is not how peer support can be integrated into existing mental health systems, but how these same systems can support the radical ontological shift that MAGs demand. Mechanisms are proposed to integrate these strategies into a broader care system, preserving their autonomy and managing risks of co-optation.