Revisiting Hume's Law

What is mental health? Evidence towards a new definition from a mixed methods multidisciplinary international survey

OBJECTIVE

Lack of consensus on the definition of mental health has implications for research, policy and practice. This study aims to start an international, interdisciplinary and inclusive dialogue to answer the question: What are the core concepts of mental health?

DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS

50 people with expertise in the field of mental health from 8 countries completed an online survey. They identified the extent to which 4 current definitions were adequate and what the core concepts of mental health were. A qualitative thematic analysis was conducted of their responses. The results were validated at a consensus meeting of 58 clinicians, researchers and people with lived experience.

RESULTS

46% of respondents rated the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC, 2006) definition as the most preferred, 30% stated that none of the 4 definitions were satisfactory and only 20% said the WHO (2001) definition was their preferred choice. The least preferred definition of mental health was the general definition of health adapted from Huber et al (2011). The core concepts of mental health were highly varied and reflected different processes people used to answer the question. These processes included the overarching perspective or point of reference of respondents (positionality), the frameworks used to describe the core concepts (paradigms, theories and models), and the way social and environmental factors were considered to act. The core concepts of mental health identified were mainly individual and functional, in that they related to the ability or capacity of a person to effectively deal with or change his/her environment. A preliminary model for the processes used to conceptualise mental health is presented.

CONCLUSIONS

Answers to the question, 'What are the core concepts of mental health?' are highly dependent on the empirical frame used. Understanding these empirical frames is key to developing a useful consensus definition for diverse populations.

Community treatment orders in New Zealand: regional variability and international comparisons

OBJECTIVES

Community treatment orders (CTOs) have been used in New Zealand since 1992 and are now used in most Commonwealth countries. There is little research on the rate of use of CTOs in New Zealand. This study compares the prevalence of CTO use across New Zealand's 20 health districts and makes comparisons with international prevalence rates.

METHODS

New Zealand Ministry of Health reports provided data on rates of CTO use in New Zealand between 2005 and 2011. International rates were obtained from published reports and academic literature on CTO use.

RESULTS

Rates of CTO use in New Zealand show marked and persistent regional variation over the period of data collection. National average rates increased from 58 per 100,000 in 2005 to 84 per 100,000 in 2011. Rates of use of CTOs are increasing internationally. New Zealand's CTO use is high by international comparisons.

CONCLUSIONS

New Zealand's high and increasing rate of CTO use by international standards raises questions about the delivery and functioning of mental health services, and about mental health service users' experience of mental health care. The high rate of CTO use needs to be addressed as a human rights issue as well as a clinical issue.

Community treatment orders and competence to consent

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this paper is to explore the relationship between civil commitment under a Community Treatment Order (CTO) and competence to consent to treatment.

METHOD

A purposive convenience sample of 10 service users under CTOs were interviewed using the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Treatment (MacCAT-T). Ratings were compared with the ratings of 10 matched voluntary service users.

RESULTS

Seventy percent of the CTO sample were found to be incompetent according to the MacCAT-T, compared to 20% of the comparison group (p = 0.004). The proportion of the CTO sample found to be incompetent reduces to 50% if the subscale of appreciation is excluded (p = 0.004). Most people in each group would elect to continue their current treatment if given the choice.

CONCLUSION

Findings of this study suggest that mental health law reform introducing considerations of competence could lead to a substantially different group of people being subject to CTOs. If the CTO is carefully targeted and not used excessively, it is likely to be accorded qualified acceptance for most service users for whom it is used.

Compulsory community mental health treatment: literature review

Following their introduction in the United States in the 1970s various forms of compulsory treatment in the community have been introduced internationally. Compulsory treatment in the community involves a statutory framework that mandates enforceable treatment in a community setting. Such frameworks can be categorized as preventative, least restrictive, or as having both preventative and least restrictive features. Research falls into two categories; descriptive, naturalistic studies and controlled and uncontrolled comparative studies. The research has produced equivocal results, and presents numerous methodological challenges. Where programmes have demonstrated improved outcomes debate continues as to whether these outcomes are associated with legal compulsion or enhanced service provision. Service user, family and clinician perspectives demonstrate a divergence of views within and across groups, with clinicians more strongly in support than service users. The issue of compulsory community treatment is an important one for nurses, who are often at the forefront of clinical service provision, in some cases in statutory roles. Critical reflection on the issue of compulsory community treatment requires understanding of the limitations of empirical investigations and of the various ethical and social policy issues involved. There is a need for further research into compulsory community treatment and possible alternatives.