Mental health recovery: Lived experience of consumers, carers and nurses

2014 ◽  
pp. 4588-4613
Author(s):  
Sini Jacob ◽  
Ian Munro ◽  
Beverley Joan Taylor
Author(s):  
Dimitar Karadzhov

Despite its seeming breadth and diversity, the bulk of the personal (mental health) recovery literature has remained strangely ‘silent’ about the impact of various socio-structural inequalities on the recovery process. Such an inadequacy of the empirical literature is not without consequences since the systematic omission or downplaying, at best, of the socio-structural conditions of living for persons with lived experience of mental health difficulties may inadvertently reinforce a reductionist view of recovery as an atomised, individualised phenomenon. Motivated by those limitations in extant scholarship, a critical literature review was conducted to identify and critique relevant research to problematise the notion of personal recovery in the context of socio-structural disadvantage such as poverty, homelessness, discrimination and inequalities. The review illuminates the scarcity of empirical research and the paucity of sociologically-informed theorisation regarding how recovery is shaped by the socio-structural conditions of living. Those inadequacies are especially pertinent to homelessness research, whereby empirical investigations of personal recovery have remained few and undertheorised. The gaps in the research and theorising about the relational, contextual and socio-structural embeddedness of recovery are distilled. The critical review concludes that personal recovery has remained underresearched, underproblematised and undertheorised, especially in the context of homelessness and other forms of socio-structural disadvantage. Understanding how exclusionary social arrangements affect individuals’ recovery, and the coping strategies that they deploy to negotiate those, is likely to inform anti-oppressive interventions that could eventually remove the structural constraints to human emancipation and flourishing.


Author(s):  
Mike Slade

A personal perspective is given on the processes involved in managing and sustaining a high-performing mental health recovery research group. The broader context of scholarship in the United Kingdom is outlined, in which academic productivity is commodified specifically in relation to peer-reviewed journal papers. Four leadership choices in developing a high-performing research group are discussed: optimal group size; sharing the workload; maintaining a programmatic focus; and performance expectations. Approaches to maximising innovation are identified, including emotional and intellectual engagement of team members, working with diverse stakeholders and convening communities of practice. We use a highly managed approach to publications from inception to acceptance, which is described in detail. The use of these approaches is illustrated in relation to the Recovery Research Team which was formed in 2009. Specific recovery-related issues covered include demonstrating the ability to develop a significant recovery research portfolio (our four current large [>UK£2 m] studies relate to recovery narratives, global mental health peer support work, digital interventions and Recovery Colleges); the positive implications of actively recruiting researchers with mental health lived experience; how performance issues are managed; our approach to involving lived experience co-authors in papers; and our decision to conduct mixed-methods rather than solely qualitative studies.


2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 483-491 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samantha Robertson ◽  
Diane Carpenter ◽  
Maggie Donovan-Hall ◽  
Ruth Bartlett

2015 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sini Jacob ◽  
Ian Munro ◽  
Beverley Joan Taylor

Author(s):  
Samantha Robertson ◽  
Diane Carpenter ◽  
Maggie Donovan-Hall

In the UK, mental health service users are asked to “tell their stories” within clinical settings as a tool for diagnosis, formulation and treatment plans. Retelling, reliving and reflecting on traumatic and distressing experiences is not a benign activity. Yet the process of reframing lived experience within a personal narrative could support the development of: a more positive identity; self-management skills and improved social connections (Slade, 2009) and therefore contribute to mental health recovery. This is an exploration of my process as a wounded researcher in the development of a version of my narrative as an autoethnography. I developed a series of 54 vignettes that described memories of my lived experience. To start, I used memorable quotes - the voices of others within my narrative. Developing and analyzing my autoethnography was visceral. It highlighted aspects of my process (and the likely process of others) and raised many unresolved dilemmas. For example: what was left out or left unsaid and the issue of “narrative truth” (Craib, 2004); reordering the vignettes for coherence; the role of relational ethics; and the impact on my identity of this difficult on-going process. It impacted on my mental health, but it has been a crucial part of my recovery.


2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 160940691876142 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joy Paton ◽  
Debbie Horsfall ◽  
Amie Carrington

This article presents an innovative tripartite approach for conducting safe and ethical ‘sensitive inquiry’ in the field of mental health recovery. The tripartite approach brings together the principles of recovery with trauma-informed practice and collective impact strategies. Together, these provide a framework for embedding and embodying recovery principles in research design and practice that empowers participants and ‘takes care’ of participants and researchers. The approach was effectively deployed in a 1-year qualitative arts–based study conducted with people living with severe and persistent mental illness. Its success was evident in the high retention rate of participants, despite their ongoing vulnerabilities, and in the elicitation of findings that expand current understandings of mental health recovery from the point of view of people with lived experience. In this article, we discuss the tripartite approach, how this was applied in the study, and what the design achieved in research outcomes and participant experience.


2010 ◽  
Vol 33 (8) ◽  
pp. 652-660 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theresa Van Lith ◽  
Patricia Fenner ◽  
Margot Schofield

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beth Vayshenker ◽  
Abby Mulay ◽  
Philip T. Yanos

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document