Why make the effort? Exploring recovery college engagement

Harper, Leanne; McKeown, Mick

doi:10.1108/mhsi-10-2017-0043

Cited by 7 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the number of locations, people or groups with whom these were carried out, and frequency did not change significantly. This could be partly because attending a course is in itself challenging, as has been found in other studies [ 3 , 25 ], and indeed a number of participants alluded to the stress of meeting new people. Recovery course attendance was not included in this measure so as not to falsely inflate arts involvement.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

“…Narrative descriptions [ 20 , 21 ], psychiatrists’ perspectives [ 22 ] and evaluation data from recovery colleges have documented largely positive outcomes. These have included participants’ perspectives on what makes recovery colleges effective [ 23 ], their impact and changes in organizational practice [ 24 ], factors that support and hinder attendance [ 25 ], participants’ experience [ 26 ], and financial savings through reductions in service use [ 18 , 27 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluation of Arts based Courses within a UK Recovery College for People with Mental Health Challenges

Stevens

Butterfield

Whittington

et al. 2018

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

No previous studies have evaluated arts based recovery college courses. Yet arts may assist in personal recovery, as often defined by service users, through social connection and personal meaning. This interdisciplinary study evaluated (i) whether self-reported wellbeing and arts activities increased following arts based recovery college courses, and (ii) how students, peer trainers and artist-trainers understood courses’ impact. The design was mixed-methods. Of 42 service user students enrolling, 39 completed a course and 37 consented to provide data. Of these, 14 completed pre and post course questionnaires on mental wellbeing and 28 on arts participation. Post course focus groups were held with six of eight peer trainers and five of seven artist-trainers, and 28 students gave written feedback. Twenty-four students were interviewed up to three times in the subsequent nine months. There were statistically significant increases in self-reported mental wellbeing and range of arts activities following course attendance. At follow-up 17 of 24 students reported improved mental wellbeing, while seven reported little or no change. Some spoke of increased social inclusion and continuing to use skills learned in the course to maintain wellbeing. Initial in-course experience of ‘artistic growth’ predicted follow-up reports of improvement. Future controlled studies should employ standardized measures of social inclusion and arts participation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Arts based Courses within a UK Recovery College for People with Mental Health Challenges

Stevens

Butterfield

Whittington

et al. 2018

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(Edgley, 2012, p.129) Despite this close relationship, Edgley (2012) does here draw a point of distinction between recovery and neoliberalism, in contrast to Braslow (2013). Other commentators assert a more clear-cut distinction between recovery and neoliberalism, going so far as to distinguish between neoliberal and non-neoliberal recovery versions (Deegan, 1998;Harper and McKeown, 2018; Recovery in the Bin, 2019; Repper and Perkins, 2003;Rose, 2014;Woods et al, 2019). Woods and colleagues (2019) note that the lack of consensus over the definition of recovery is rooted in a fundamental dichotomy between recovery versions that are either top-down policy directives or bottom-up survivor-led programmes of action (see also Recovery in the Bin, 2019).…”

Section: Systemic Neoliberalist Recovery Versions Versus Lifeworld Recovery Versionsmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Conversely, policy implementations of recovery emphasise reduction in service dependency and service provision (Ramanuj et al, 2015), which is viewed by some as a veiled attempt to ration and dilute services (Dickerson, 2006;Jacobson and Greenley 2001;McKeown et al, 2017;Mind, 2008;Robertson, 2016;Slade et al, 2014). Consequent to this last interpretation of recovery, some activists, such as 'Recovery in the Bin', have rejected the concept altogether (Harper and McKeown, 2018; see https://recoveryinthebin.org/). According to this group, recovery is a fundamentally flawed notion, whose imprecise meaning renders it too easily co-opted by a neoliberalist agenda.…”

Section: Recovery a 'Polyvalent' Conceptmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They view this neoliberalist co-option as a cover for coercion, victim blaming and removal of services under a drive towards austerity. The alternative term 'unrecovered' is adopted by this group to express their dissension towards neoliberalist recovery (Harper and McKeown, 2018). This latter view is one instance of the broad observation about the colonised status of recovery models (Amering and Schmolke, 2009;Barker, 2003;Mind, 2008).…”

Section: Recovery a 'Polyvalent' Conceptmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Experiences of care continuity and recovery for people at the interface of primary and secondary mental health care in Wales: a thematic discourse analytic approach

Weaver¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study explores talk about experiences of care continuity and recovery for people with serious mental health issues at the interface of primary and secondary mental healthcare in Wales. The approach adopted was qualitative, employing a methodology of thematic discourse analysis of talk generated by in-depth, semi-structured interviews. The study was conducted in two phases, the first round involving (n = 16) service users who had transited from secondary to primary care, and the second round involving (n = 16) workers and practitioners involved in supporting service users at the primary-secondary interface.The main findings were first that participants' expectations were misaligned with transforming service structures and interfaces. Second, participants constructed competing versions of recovery in their talk. Third, analysis of talk revealed experiences of care discontinuities in multiple areas, concentrated particularly at the primary level. On this basis, it is argued that a proliferation of competing recovery versions, and misaligned expectations of transforming But my most heartfelt debt of gratitude is directed towards those closest to me. My wife Zoe's support was crucial so very often, particularly with respect to the two children we have had whilst doing this PhD, Bridget and James, whose infantile support I would also like to acknowledge. From the start I think she has known the sacrifice she would need to make, and she has done so admirably. I would also like to thank God for restoring me to the point of this undertaking, sustaining me continually throughout the journey, and without whom I am nothing. Finally, my many thanks go to my Dad whose support is obvious and gratefully received, and of course my mother-in-law, Diana, who looked after both babies so many times in my stead, thereby allowing me to focus on my work! Contents ContentsChapter 1: Introduction

show abstract