Destabilising social inclusion and recovery, and pursuing 'lines of flight' in the mental health sector

Poststructuralism and the construction of subjectivities in forensic mental health: Opportunities for resistance

Nurses working in correctional and forensic mental health settings face unique challenges in the provision of care to patients within custodial settings. The subjectivities of both patients and nurses are subject to the power relations, discourses and abjection encountered within these practice milieus. Using a poststructuralist approach using the work of Foucault, Kristeva, and Deleuze and Guattari, this paper explores how both patient and nurse subjectivities are produced within the carceral logic of this apparatus of capture. Recognizing that subjectivities are fluid and dynamic, and capable of change, Deleuze and Guattari's concept of deterritorialization will illustrate opportunities for resistance, where nurses can begin to practice outside the dominant carceral logic (and restrictions) of the system.

Resistance to the biomedicalization of mental illness through peer support: The case of peer specialists and mental health

Certified peer specialists (CPS) are mental health professionals who draw their expertise from lived experience with mental illness and mental distress. They tale a nonmedical, nonclinical approach to providing support to community members with mental health difficulties and in doing so, emphasize the role of social environmental factors that contribute to mental distress. Their perspectives are contrary to the biomedical perspective of mainstream psychiatry. While there is a significant body of literature on CPS, there is a dearth of research on how CPS engage in and perceive the broader mental health system. They resist the biomedicalization of mental illness by moving past labels and the language of pathology to facilitate recovery from mental illness and to resist stigma. Drawing from in-depth interviews with peer specialists, participant observation of a peer-run organization, and a survey of peer specialists across the United States, I ask the following research questions: How and why are CPS challenging the medical model of mental illness? How do CPS consider social environmental factors in the etiology of distress and what are the potential implications for resistance to both biomedicalization and stigmatization? My data suggest that CPS, in their critiques of the medical model and the mental health system, are actively resisting the biomedicalization of mental illness and focus on social environmental factors that contribute to experiences of distress. This research has meaningful implications for research on CPS and hope for recovery from mental illness.

"Nothing's changed, baby": How the mental health narratives of people with multiple and complex needs disrupt the recovery framework

The dominant narrative in mental health policy and practice has shifted in the 21st century from one of chronic ill health to a 'recovery' orientation. Knowledge of recovery is based on narratives of people with lived experience of mental distress. However the narratives of people experiencing structural inequalities are under-represented in recovery research. Meanwhile, uses of recovery narratives have been critiqued by survivor-researchers as a co-option of lived experience to serve neoliberal agendas. To address these twin concerns, we undertook a performative narrative analysis of two 'recovery narratives' of people with multiple and complex needs, analysing their co-construction at immediate/micro and structural/macro levels. We found two contrasting responses to the invitation to tell a recovery story: a narrative of personal lack and a narrative of resistance. We demonstrate through reflexive worked examples how the genre of recovery narrative, focused on personal transformation, may function to occlude structural causes of mental distress and reinforce personal responsibility in the face of unchanging living conditions. We conclude that unacknowledged epistemological assumptions may contribute to co-constructing individualist accounts of recovery. A critical, reflexive approach, together with transparent researcher positionality, is imperative to avoid the epistemic injustice of a decontextualised form of recovery narrative.

Stigma Toward Substance Dependence: Causes, Consequences, and Potential Interventions

Substance dependence is a prevalent and urgent public health problem. In 2021, 60 million Americans reported abusing alcohol within the month prior to being surveyed, and nearly 20 million Americans reported using illegal drugs (e.g., heroin) or prescription drugs (e.g., opioids) for nonmedical reasons in the year before. Drug-involved overdose rates have been steadily increasing over the past 20 years. This increase has been primarily driven by opioid and stimulant use. Despite its prevalence, drug dependence is one of the most stigmatized health conditions. Stigma has myriad negative consequences for its targets, including limiting their access to employment and housing, disrupting interpersonal relationships, harming physical and mental health, and reducing help-seeking. However, because research on stigma toward people with substance use disorders (SUDs) is relatively sparse compared with research on stigma toward other mental illnesses, the field lacks a comprehensive understanding of the causes and consequences of SUD stigma. Moreover, it remains unclear how, if at all, these factors differ from other types of mental illness stigma. The goal of this review is to take stock of the literature on SUD stigma, providing a clear set of foundational principles and a blueprint for future research and translational activity.

Epistemic citizenship under structural siege: a meta-analysis drawing on 544 voices of service user experiences in Nordic mental health services

This paper presents a meta-analysis, drawing exclusively on qualitative research (n = 38), which contributes to findings on mental health service user experiences of received provisions and/or encounters in contemporary social and mental health services in the Nordic countries. The main objective is to identify facilitators of, and barriers to, various notions of service user involvement. Our findings provide empirical evidence regarding service users' experiences of participation in their encounters with mental health services. We identified two overarching themes, professional relations and the regulative framework and current rule and norm system, in the reviewed literature concerning facilitators and hindrances of user involvement in mental health services. By including the interrelated policy concept of 'active citizenship' and theoretical concept of 'epistemic (in)justice' in the analyses, the results provide foundations for broader exploration and problematization of the policy ideals of what we call 'epistemic citizenship' and contemporary practices in Nordic mental health organizations. Our conclusions include suggestions that linking micro-level experiences to organizational macro-level circumstances opens up avenues for further research on service user involvement.

Inclusion as Assimilation, Integration, or Co-optation? A Post-Structural Analysis of Inclusion as Produced Through Mental Health Research on Peer Support

In the last 20 years, research on the inclusion of peer support within mental health settings has burgeoned, paralleling the broad adoption of service user inclusion within policy as a moral imperative and universally beneficial. Despite the seemingly progressive impetus behind inclusion, increasingly peer support workers talk of exhaustion working within mental health systems, the slow rate of change to oppressive values and practices, and ongoing experiences of workplace exclusion. Such experiences suggest differences in the way in which inclusion is produced across different stakeholder groups and contexts. In this article, we adopt Bacchi's 'what's the problem represented to be?' approach to identify how mental health research, often understood as an a-political activity, produces versions of inclusion. We argue current research predominantly produces inclusion as 'assimilation' and 'integration'. We use critical inclusion, mental health, and survivor scholarship to evaluate the effects these productions have for peer support and peer support workers, finding that both problematise peer support workers and those seeking support. We consider possibilities for more liberatory productions of inclusion, building on the notion of inclusion as 'co-optation'. Our analysis points to the need for researchers to engage with an uncomfortable reflexivity to enable more emancipatory possibilities regarding inclusion and peer support.

Therapists' Experience of Video Consultation in Specialized Mental Health Services During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Qualitative Interview Study

Background

As part of political and professional development with increased focus on including service users within mental health services, these services are being transformed. Specifically, they are shifting from institutional to noninstitutional care provision with increased integration of the use of electronic health and digitalization. In the period from March to May 2020, COVID-19 restrictions forced rapid changes in the organization and provision of mental health services through the increased use of digital solutions in therapy.

Objective

The aim of this study was to develop and advance comprehensive knowledge about how therapists experience the use of video consultation (VC). To reach this objective, we evaluated therapists’ experiences of using VC in specialized mental health services in the early phase of COVID-19 restrictions. The following questions were explored through interviews: Which opportunities and challenges appeared when using VC during the period of COVID-19 restrictions? In a short-term care pathway, for whom does VC work and for whom does it not work?

Methods

This study employed a qualitative approach based on an abductive strategy and hermeneutic-phenomenological methodology. Therapists and managers in mental health departments in a hospital were interviewed via Skype for Business from March to May 2020, using a thematic interview guide that aimed to encourage reflections on the use of VC during COVID-19 restrictions.

Results

Therapists included in this study experienced advantages in using VC under circumstances that did not permit face-to-face consultations. The continuity that VC offered the service users was seen as a valuable asset. Various negative aspects concerning the therapeutic environment such as lack of safety for the most vulnerable service users and topics deemed unsuitable for VC lowered the therapists’ overall impression of the service. The themes that arose in the data analysis have been categorized in the following main topics: (1) VC—“it’s better than nothing”; (2) VC affects therapists’ work situation—opportunities and challenges in working conditions; and (3) challenges of VC when performing professional assessment and therapy on the screen.

Conclusions

Experiences with VC in a mental health hospital during COVID-19 restrictions indicate that there are overall advantages to using VC when circumstances do not permit face-to-face consultations. Nevertheless, various negative aspects in the use of VC lowered the therapists’ overall impression of VC. Further qualitative research is needed, and future studies should focus on service users’ experiences, cocreation between different stakeholders, and how to scale up the use of VC while ensuring that the service provided is appropriate, safe, and available.

A socio-emotional analysis of technology use by people with intellectual disabilities

BACKGROUND

Access to information and communication technologies (ICTs) is often thought to enhance the lives of people with intellectual disabilities (ID) and is considered an important aspect of digital inclusion. However, inclusion practices often fail to address societal inequalities that lead to and sustain exclusion. The aim of this research was to enhance understandings of the relationships people with ID form with technology by critically analysing the underlying assumptions of inclusion practices.

METHOD

We employed a post-qualitative approach to reanalyse previously collected data from face-to-face interviews with 10 Australian adults with ID who attended a community literacy programme about their technology use in their daily lives. Two of social theorist Sara Ahmed's key concepts were used to analyse these data: (1) 'stickiness' of emotions, where certain (socially dominant) emotions are considered to attach to objects over time (e.g. mobile phone use is normal/good) and (2) 'fit' between people and objects, where there is a sense of comfort when objects are designed for people like you - those outside the 'norm' experience discomfort and a sense of being 'othered' in their interactions with such objects which do not fit them.

RESULTS

Our analysis identified how people with ID often attributed positive feelings to technology even when they had seemingly negative interactions with their devices (e.g. they could not use certain features, caregivers acted as gatekeepers to access). The positive associations were likely the outcome of implicitly held understandings that society highly values technology (Ahmed's stickiness of emotions). Although some participants accessed technology without difficulty, others experienced discomfort due to difficulties using devices that were not designed for them (Ahmed's fit between people and objects). Importantly, some participants had access to technology and the technical skill to use ICTs, but other factors, such as not having many friends, impacted their ability to use their devices in meaningful ways.

CONCLUSION

Our analysis suggests that digital inclusion practices focused on providing access to technology may unintentionally harm in ways that are not immediately apparent when working with people with ID. Harms might include further marginalisation or 'othering' of people with ID. It is important to recognise that well-meaning attempts to encourage use of ICTs may be counterproductive if they lead to experiences of marginalisation. To avoid this, inclusion practices could focus beyond access to devices, and the ability to use them, to include considerations of the multiple socio-emotional effects. What is a good fit is not entirely predeterminable, exploration of the possibilities for what will work well for any individual requires experimentation and creativity, and a careful attention to unintended effects. Beyond this, the development of new technology should consider how to diversify devices that often fail to fit people with disabilities.