The aim of this paper was to review the existing literature pertaining to stigma, negative attitudes and discrimination towards mental illness, specifically as viewed through the lens of the nursing profession. The results of the literature review were synthesized and analysed, and the major themes drawn from this were found to correspond with Schulze's model identifying three positions that healthcare workers may assume in relation to stigma of mental illness: 'stigmatizers', 'stigmatized' and 'de-stigmatizers'. In this paper, the nursing profession is examined from the perspectives of the first two major themes: the 'stigmatizers' and 'stigmatized'. Their primary sub-themes are identified and discussed: (1) Nurses as 'the stigmatizers': (a) nurses' attitudes in general medical settings towards patients with psychiatric illness and (b) psychiatric nurses; (2) Nurses as 'the stigmatized': (a) nurses who have mental illness and (b) stigma within the profession against psychiatric nurses and/or psychiatry in general. The secondary and tertiary sub-themes are also identified and reviewed.
During the post-World War II baby boom, increasing numbers of children with significant disabilities survived the birth process and lived longer than their predecessors. Many viewed them as less valuable than others and incapable of developing to more than the level of an infant without disabilities (Kliewer & Drake, 1998). Predictably, they were excluded or rejected from public schools and private alternatives emerged and proliferated. Most who provided direct services in these segregated private settings were untrained, relatively low paid, not college educated, or licensed. Subsequently, some legislatures established tax supported settings for these excluded and rejected children. Two additional segregated service models emerged: tax supported government operated programs and private services supported by public school tax dollars. In these settings, it was not unusual for one teacher and five
Problematic substance use (PSU) among nurses has wide-ranging adverse implications. A critical integrative literature review was conducted with an emphasis on building knowledge regarding the influence of structural factors within nurses' professional environments on nurses with PSU. Five thematic categories emerged: (i) access, (ii) stress, and (iii) attitudes as contributory factors, (iv) treatment policies for nurses with PSU, and (v) the culture of the nursing profession. Conclusions were that an overemphasis on individual culpability and failing predominates in the literature and that crucial knowledge gaps exist regarding the influence of structural factors on driving and shaping nurses' substance use.
We undertook an institutional ethnography utilizing the expert knowledge of nurses who have experienced substance-use problems to discover: (a) What are the discourses embedded in the talk among nurses in their everyday work worlds that socially organize their substance-use practices and (b) how do those discourses manage these activities? Data collection included interviews, researcher reflexivity, and texts that were critically analyzed with a focus on institutional features. Analysis revealed dominant moralistic and individuated discourses in nurses’ workplace talk that socially organized their substance-use practices, subordinated and silenced experiences of work stress, and erased employers’ roles in managing working conditions. Conclusions included that nurses used substances in ways that enabled them to remain silent and keep working. Nurses’ education did not prepare them regarding nurses’ substance-use problems or managing emotional labor. Nurses viewed alcohol as an acceptable and encouraged coping strategy for nurses to manage emotional distress.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.