Putting Values into Practice: Public Policy and the Future of Mental Health Consumer‐run Organizations

Abstract

The purpose of the paper is to reflect on value dilemmas in mental health consumer-run organizations and to discuss implications for research, policy, and practice. We review the roots of consumer-run organizations in the self-help movement and the psychiatric survivor liberation movement, focusing on the distinctive values espoused by consumer-run organizations. We also discuss evidence-based and value-based approaches to mental health policy formulation and mental health reform, noting the particular importance of value-based approaches and the role that consumer-run organizations can play in mental health reform. Based on our experiences conducting a participatory action research study of four mental health consumer-run organizations, we identify and examine several value dilemmas, discuss the lessons that we learned about these value dilemmas, and note their implications for future directions in research, policy, and practice.

Participatory Spaces of Mental Health Service User Organizations in the Post-deinstitutional Era: Mapping Roles and Challenges

“…The challenges and value conflicts arising from developments in the role of MHSUOs are frequently described in the included texts (Boyce et al 2010;Gillard et al 2016;Nelson et al 2008;Ostrow and Adams 2012). We argue that these challenges are related to how MHSUOs in the post-deinstitutional era simultaneously participate in social processes related to popular, claimed or invited spaces.…”

“…Included texts originate in many different disciplines, reflecting a lack of disciplinary dominance over this field of research. However, a number of authors are represented in several texts, which is especially noteworthy with regard to Nelson who is the co-author of six texts Nelson et al 2006aNelson et al , b, 2007Nelson et al , 2008Nelson and Lomotey 2006) and Brown who is represented as author or co-author of eight texts (Brown 2009a, b;Brown et al 2007aBrown et al , b, 2008aBrown et al , b, 2010Brown and Townley 2015). The frequent representation of US authors from community psychiatry studies potentially creates bias to issues central within that context and field.…”

Towards a Theory of Change for Community-based Research Projects

“…It is anticipated that when people jointly produce and share knowledge, they are more likely to use that knowledge to guide their short-and long-term collective action (Kemmis and McTaggart, 2005). This is made possible through a relevant, participatory and rigorous research process that addresses potential value dilemmas among stakeholders (Nelson et al, 2008) and that builds agreement on common goals despite potentially different perspectives and interests (Janzen et al, 2012). More specifically, co-produced knowledge that is shared widely within and outside the research partnership can engage people in the interpretation of findings (Denis et al, 2003;Golden-Biddle et al, 2003;Jansson et al, 2009) and can lead to new ways of working together around a common concern and to new products and practice that facilitate social innovation (Ochocka and Janzen, 2014).…”

Rôle du communautaire en santé mentale dans un système en évolution : état des connaissances et recommandations

“…Elles verront l'apparition des premiers organismes de défense des droits en santé mentale. Inspirés des « survivors américains » et du mouvement antipsychiatrique (Nelson, Janzen, Trainor et Ochocka, 2008), ces OCSM centrent leur discours sur la o 1 critique des traitements psychiatriques et de la défense des droits des personnes hospitalisées involontairement (RRASMQ, 2011). Ils mettent aussi l'accent sur la répartition équitable des richesses, le droit pour tous à l'éducation, au travail, au logement et à un revenu équitable ainsi qu'à l'acquisition du pouvoir d'agir individuel et collectif des personnes ayant des troubles mentaux (Nelson, Janzen, Trainor et Ochocka, 2008).…”

“…Inspirés des « survivors américains » et du mouvement antipsychiatrique (Nelson, Janzen, Trainor et Ochocka, 2008), ces OCSM centrent leur discours sur la o 1 critique des traitements psychiatriques et de la défense des droits des personnes hospitalisées involontairement (RRASMQ, 2011). Ils mettent aussi l'accent sur la répartition équitable des richesses, le droit pour tous à l'éducation, au travail, au logement et à un revenu équitable ainsi qu'à l'acquisition du pouvoir d'agir individuel et collectif des personnes ayant des troubles mentaux (Nelson, Janzen, Trainor et Ochocka, 2008). Dans les années 1970 également apparaît un autre courant d'OCSM qui, en opposition au modèle biomédical et hospitalo-centriste dominant en psychiatrie, va chercher à « traiter ailleurs et autrement » par la création de pratiques innovantes en santé mentale, et ce, dans des ressources de « taille humaine » situées dans la communauté (RRASMQ, 2009).…”