How Social Work Can Contribute in the Shift to Personalised, Recovery-Oriented Psycho-Social Disability Support Services

Abstract

This paper presents the findings from an Australian study in which forty-one people, who self-identified as having a psychosocial disability as a result of mental health problems, spoke about their priorities for treatment, care and support within a personalised funding context. The research enabled an improved understanding of the choices about support that people with psychosocial disabilities would make if offered individualised funding packages. Participant's prioritised specific supports to improve their health, financial situation, social connection, housing and personal relationships. A relationship with a support worker with a range of skills was identified as a key facilitator of these life goals, but people with psychosocial disabilities also valued opportunities to have discretionary funds to directly address the major problems they face including stigma, discrimination and poverty. The paper argues that social workers can potentially fill a range of roles and are well placed to work in partnership with people with psychosocial disabilities, having skills in co-production of services, negotiation and advocacy that are required if individual funding is to be maximised for user control, social justice and personal recovery outcomes.

Work-Related Satisfaction among Clinicians Working at Inpatient Treatment Facilities for Substance Use Disorder: The Role of Recovery Orientation

“…Some of the core tasks at facilities providing inpatient SUD treatment include promoting change and development [ 30 , 31 , 32 ]. Environmental factors that have been shown to foster positive change (i.e., contextual psychosocial factors that enable development, satisfaction and well-being) include user involvement and empowerment, diversity of treatment options, individualised treatment measures, and the opportunity to pursue individually defined goals [ 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 ].…”

Social recovery: a new interpretation to recovery-orientated services – a critical literature review

“…From observations of this approach, this perspective of the recovery process can be, and often is, paternalistic in nature. For example, Brophy et al (2015) highlight that participants observed mental health challenges as long term, citing these challenges as ongoing psychosocial disabilities that participants expected to continue over a prolonged period. The effects of such disability are substantial, with Brophy et al (2015) categorising them under three tiers: life-long learning activities, social interactions and employment.…”

“…For example, Brophy et al (2015) highlight that participants observed mental health challenges as long term, citing these challenges as ongoing psychosocial disabilities that participants expected to continue over a prolonged period. The effects of such disability are substantial, with Brophy et al (2015) categorising them under three tiers: life-long learning activities, social interactions and employment. Each can cause service users to become more insular, creating an isolating and stigmatising environment, which serves as a negative loop.…”

“…Here, health refers to optimal mental, physical and social health. Participants in Brophy et al (2015) study stressed the link between these aspects of the health continuum, stating that it is the connection between physical, social and mental health that is important for the overall well-being of the individual. This is further stressed by Ford et al (2015) who highlight that due to the dictatorial approach used within coercive environments, other aspect of the health continuum deteriorates.…”

Legal capacity and the mental health social worker role: an international comparison

“…This represents additional supports and is not a substitute for clinical care by mental health providers in hospital and community. Mental health social workers will form a large component of the rapidly expanding disability workforce and will need to consider what they have to offer such a scheme and how to support increased choice and control by people like John (Brophy et al, 2015).…”