Introduction. Personality disorders are common mental health disorders, with an estimated lifetime prevalence of 4 to 15%. People living with personality disorders are extensively seeking mental health services, yet few papers focus on their unique occupational needs or effective rehabilitation interventions that may alleviate the occupational issues they face. Occupational therapists are encouraged to support engagement in socially valued occupations, while preventing engagement in damaging ones, despite a lack of evidence on the meaning and the lived experiences of people. Objectives. This paper describes the meaning attributed by people living with personality disorders to their main occupations and the underlying needs they strive to fulfill through occupational engagement, whether or not these occupations are sanctioned. Methods. This exploratory study rests on a descriptive interpretative methodology. The participants were ten men and women, aged between 18 and 35 years old and living with a Cluster B personality disorder. A semistructured interview guide allowed participants to build narratives on occupations that are important to them and discuss how these occupations shape their identity. A thematic content analysis fostered the development of a coding structure that reflected a first-account perspective. Results. The narratives provided by the participants depict a variety of meaningful occupations, many of which are socially disapproved. Many of these occupations serve as a coping strategy to deal with distressing situations, to connect with others who share similar life experiences, or to reestablish a fragile sense of control. Other occupations are socially disapproved due to the overinvestment of the participants’ commitment. While participants described how this overinvestment allowed them to control destructive impulses, significant others perceived it as counterproductive and unnecessary. Participants perceived self-care occupations as painful and tedious chores or meaningless occupations. Engaging in productive occupations allowed some participants to gain recognition or to identify their competencies, but also confirmed their differences, creating some form of alienation or marginalisation. Conclusion. This exploratory study invites clinicians and researchers to develop a more responsive understanding of occupational engagement for this population. The results highlight the importance of situating occupations in their context, while endorsing a first-account perspective, to better understand the forces that shape occupational engagement. Ultimately, occupational therapists should critically appraise their assumptions around healthy and unsanctioned occupations, in order to respond with sensitivity to the needs and experience of their clients, without perpetuating the marginalisation and discrimination they face.
Parenting and personality disorder: clinical and child protection implications
