Stigma in Early Detection of Psychosis: Subjective Experiences of Those Concerned

Author(s):  
Martina Uttinger

2017 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. S387-S387
Author(s):  
M. Uttinger ◽  
C. Rapp ◽  
E. Studerus ◽  
K. Beck ◽  
A. Riecher-Rössler

IntroductionDespite the large scientific debate concerning potentially stigmatizing effects of informing an individual about being in an at-risk mental state (ARMS) for psychosis, studies investigating this topic are rare and quantitative assessment of this kind of stigmatization does not exist so far.ObjectivesThis study presents first results regarding potentially helpful or stigmatizing effects of being informed about an ARMS assessed with a newly developed quantitative self-rating (FePsy-Stigma questionnaire).MethodsForty ARMS patients participating in the prospective Basel Early Detection of Psychosis (FePsy) study as well as patients clinically assessed in the early detection service of the Psychiatric Services of Solothurn, completed the FePsy-Stigma questionnaire during their follow-up assessments at least six months after they had been informed about their increased risk of developing psychosis. The questionnaire was constructed based on a previous qualitative study and on adapted versions of formerly used instruments for assessing stigma in mental health (Internalized Stigma of Mental Illness Scale, Personal Beliefs and Experiences Questionnaire).ResultsStigmatization appeared to be low overall except for social withdrawal due to suspected stigma. Stigma resistance, stereotype awareness and expected discrimination scored considerably higher than actually experienced discrimination, alienation and stereotype endorsement.ConclusionsThe results suggest that early detection services help individuals cope with symptoms and build certain resilience toward potential stigmatization, rather than enhancing or causing the latter. In line with previous studies, our results indicate that there is a considerable difference between expected and actually experienced discrimination as well as between stereotype awareness and stereotype endorsement.Disclosure of interestThe authors have not supplied their declaration of competing interest.



2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 414-424
Author(s):  
Rochelle Cohen-Schneider ◽  
Melodie T. Chan ◽  
Denise M. McCall ◽  
Allison M. Tedesco ◽  
Ann P. Abramson

Background Speech-language pathologists make clinical decisions informed by evidence-based theory and “beliefs, values and emotional experiences” ( Hinckley, 2005 , p. 265). These subjective processes, while not extensively studied, underlie the workings of the therapeutic relationship and contribute to treatment outcomes. While speech-language pathologists do not routinely pay attention to subjective experiences of the therapeutic encounter, social workers do. Thus, the field of social work makes an invaluable contribution to the knowledge and skills of speech-language pathologists. Purpose This clinical focus article focuses on the clinician's contribution to the therapeutic relationship by surfacing elements of the underlying subjective processes. Method Vignettes were gathered from clinicians in two community aphasia programs informed by the principles of the Life Participation Approach to Aphasia. Results and Discussion By reflecting on and sharing aspects of clinical encounters, clinicians reveal subjective processing occurring beneath the surface. The vignettes shed light on the following clinical behaviors: listening to the client's “whole self,” having considerations around self-disclosure, dealing with biases, recognizing and surfacing clients' identities, and fostering hope. Speech-language pathologists are given little instruction on the importance of the therapeutic relationship, how to conceptualize this relationship, and how to balance this relationship with professionalism. Interprofessional collaboration with social workers provides a rich opportunity to learn ways to form and utilize the benefits of a strong therapeutic relationship while maintaining high standards of ethical behavior. Conclusion This clinical focus article provides speech-language pathologists with the “nuts and bolts” for considering elements of the therapeutic relationship. This is an area that is gaining traction in the field of speech-language pathology and warrants further investigation.



2001 ◽  
Vol 120 (5) ◽  
pp. A606-A606
Author(s):  
Y MORII ◽  
T YOSHIDA ◽  
T MATSUMATA ◽  
T ARITA ◽  
K SHIMODA ◽  
...  


2004 ◽  
Vol 171 (4S) ◽  
pp. 481-481
Author(s):  
Ravery V. Vincent ◽  
Chautard D. Denis ◽  
Arnauld A. Villers ◽  
Laurent Boccon Gibbod


2010 ◽  
Vol 43 (5) ◽  
pp. 25
Author(s):  
KERRI WACHTER


2003 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 136
Author(s):  
C MEUNE ◽  
C GIRAUDEAU ◽  
H BECANE ◽  
O PASCAL ◽  
P LAFORET ◽  
...  


2016 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 125-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah E. Gaither ◽  
Jessica D. Remedios ◽  
Jennifer R. Schultz ◽  
Keith B. Maddox ◽  
Samuel R. Sommers

Abstract. Research shows that I-sharing, or sharing subjective experiences with an outgroup member, positively shapes attitudes toward that outgroup member. We investigated whether this type of social experience would also promote a positive interracial interaction with a novel outgroup member. Results showed that White and Black participants who I-shared with a racial outgroup member (vs. I-sharing with a racial ingroup member) expressed more liking toward that outgroup member. However, I-sharing with an outgroup member did not reduce anxious behavior in a future social interaction with a novel racial outgroup member. Therefore, although sharing subjective experiences may increase liking toward one individual from a racial outgroup, it remains to be seen whether this positive experience can influence behaviors in future interactions with other racial outgroup members. Future directions are discussed.



Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document