Temporalities of mental health recovery

McWade, Brigit

doi:10.1057/sub.2015.8

Cited by 11 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 28 publications

(27 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Experiences of distress can have particular relationships to the past through a rootedness in traumatic life events, the effects of which may ebb and flow in the present and also impact on decisions made about the future (Brown and Reavey 2015). Considerable literature supports the idea that past and future life experience can bear heavily on present levels of distress, and that living with ongoing mental health problems can often involve remaining connected to past life events, and concerns and anxieties about what the future may hold (McWade 2015, Read et al 2018, Van der Kolk 1987. Analytically connecting the already-overlapping temporalities of distress with immediacy of online forums is key to revealing how crisis moments come to be labelled, supported and experienced online.…”

Section: Digital Immediacymentioning

confidence: 99%

Temporalities of mental distress: digital immediacy and the meaning of ‘crisis’ in online support

Tucker

Lavis

2019

Sociology Health & Illness

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Internet is increasingly used to seek support by those suffering with mental distress (Bauman, S. and Rivers, I. Mental Health and the Digital Age. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan; 2015). Drawing on research on a major online peer support forum, we analyse discussions around acute distress, self‐harm and suicide. The paper argues that new temporalities of mental health ‘crisis’ are emerging through the intersection of the immediacy of online support, the chronicity of underlying distress and the punctuated nature of professional support. Online support adds a layer of temporal immediacy that does not traditionally feature in other forms of support (e.g. professional in‐person services). This shifts the meaning of a mental health ‘crisis’ from acute to processual, and can lead to definitions of ‘crisis’ being used when not desired nor necessarily accurate. By attending to the layering of temporalities at the intersections of professional in‐person, and online support, we demonstrate how parameters of crisis support are set – by whom, for whom and in relation to whose bodies. This has implications for professional clinical practice internationally in relation to the increased digitisation of support and the meanings of ‘crisis’ that emerge.

show abstract

Section: Digital Immediacymentioning

confidence: 99%

Temporalities of mental distress: digital immediacy and the meaning of ‘crisis’ in online support

Tucker

Lavis

2019

Sociology Health & Illness

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Further analysis does suggest complex and competing ideas which coexist with this narrow view of recovery. In making these apparent, we firstly discuss three themes that map on to the struggles over practice, expertise and evidence 1 foreshadowed by the literature review: “troubled clinical responsibility”, “extended virtue of (technological) self-care” and “altered ontologies and psychopathologies of time”. Within the concluding discussion we explicitly connect these back to recovery.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…“Recovery” has been iterated as the new “paradigm in mental health policy and practice.” 1 In “No health without mental health: A cross-government mental health outcomes strategy for people of all ages’ 2 the coalition government set six mental health objectives, one of which was that more people with mental health problems will recover. This recovery-guided approach is continued in “Closing the gap: Priorities for essential change in mental health”, 3 where a commitment is made to commission services with an emphasis on recovery.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Exploring how chatbots shape, and are shaped by, the concept of mental health recovery requires us to look both at overt reference to recovery as well as possible sites of socio-political struggles that may come to conceptualize recovery. 1 To operationalise this, we derive analytic directives by bringing contradiction, contention and debates within the literature on chatbots into dialogue with the existing literature on the meanings of mental health recovery. We then move to outline the methodological and analytical focus.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Conversational agents and the making of mental health recovery

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Artificial intelligence (AI) is said to be “transforming mental health”. AI-based technologies and technique are now considered to have uses in almost every domain of mental health care: including decision-making, assessment and healthcare management. What remains underexplored is whether/how mental health recovery is situated within these discussions and practices. Method Taking conversational agents as our point of departure, we explore the ways official online materials explain and make sense of chatbots, their imagined functionality and value for (potential) users. We focus on three chatbots for mental health: Woebot, Wysa and Tess. Findings “Recovery” is largely missing as an overt focus across materials. However, analysis does reveal themes that speak to the struggles over practice, expertise and evidence that the concept of recovery articulates. We discuss these under the headings “troubled clinical responsibility”, “extended virtue of (technological) self-care” and “altered ontologies and psychopathologies of time”. Conclusions Ultimately, we argue that alongside more traditional forms of recovery, chatbots may be shaped by, and shaping, an increasingly individualised form of a “personal recovery imperative”.

show abstract

“…In the aftermath of this large scale reorganisation of mental health services, the seeds were sown for the growth of the Recovery movement (Anthony, 1993). By the 1990s, the concept of Recovery had been taken up by mental health services (McWade, 2015), then authorized via policy (Ramon, Healy, & Renouf, 2007) until it became the guiding principle for mental health services in the English-speaking world this century (Slade, 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The governance of sexuality in a Recovery‐oriented mental health service: Psychosis, consumers and clinical approaches

Evans

Quinn²,

McKenna

2019

Psychiatric Ment Health Nurs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accessible summary What is known on the subject The intersection of sexuality and psychosis has a long history, yet research in this area has been minimal over the past few decades. Mental health clinicians practice from within the confines of a mental health system that is founded on a conflict between containment and care and that positions the consumer as an object of care. At the same time, mental health services often have a Recovery approach to care. This presents a difficulty and tension in mental health clinical work because the Recovery approach is opposed to positioning the consumer as an object. What this paper adds to existing knowledge The findings suggest that sexuality and sexual needs are common to both clinicians and consumers, and via identification, make the two groups more similar than different. Sexuality can problematize and so open up questions about the objectification of consumers. Consideration of consumers' sexuality and sexual needs can therefore work as a resistance to the dominant mental health approach and, in doing so, produce a more Recovery‐oriented approach to treatment in terms of how the consumer is positioned. Other aspects of living that escape capture by the diagnostic system may also operate as organizing factors for a more subject‐to‐subject approach to treatment. The implications for practice Focusing on sexuality and other aspects of living that escape capture by the diagnostic system can bring into question the way consumers are objectified by the psychiatric model of care. AbstractIntroductionThe Recovery approach introduced a radical shift in the positioning of consumers as subjects rather than objects of mental health treatment. While this approach has been internationally adopted, the practice of Recovery has been under‐researched and a knowledge gap exists regarding the intersection of sexuality and psychosis.AimThe study aim was to investigate how sexuality was governed in a long‐stay mental health rehabilitation facility that was Recovery‐oriented.MethodA case study methodology with a conceptual framework using Foucault's work on disciplinary power was used.ResultsThe findings illustrated how mental health clinicians were caught between two main and incompatible models of care: a psychiatric one and a Recovery one.DiscussionWhile the policy framework authorized a Recovery approach, clinicians practised surveillance, hierarchical observation and normalization, which are tenants of a psychiatric model of care. However, the study found that sexuality was an area that opened questions about the psychiatric model for clinicians. Consideration of consumers' sexual needs allowed the clinicians to think of consumers more as subjects like themselves than as objects to be treated.Implications for practiceConsideration of consumers' sexuality opens up possibilities for questioning the objectification of the consumer via the psychiatric model.

show abstract

Temporalities of mental health recovery

Cited by 11 publications

References 28 publications

Temporalities of mental distress: digital immediacy and the meaning of ‘crisis’ in online support

Temporalities of mental distress: digital immediacy and the meaning of ‘crisis’ in online support

Conversational agents and the making of mental health recovery

The governance of sexuality in a Recovery‐oriented mental health service: Psychosis, consumers and clinical approaches

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About