Professional boundaries: crossing a line or entering the shadows?

This article explores the professional boundaries guidance for social workers. It presents research findings from the formal literature, from agency codes of practice, from telephone interviews with regulatory and professional bodies and from an exercise using ‘snowballing techniques’ in which informants responded to brief scenarios illustrating boundary dilemmas. The findings suggest that formal research plays little part in the guidance that individuals use to help them determine professional boundaries. Similarly, only 10–15 per cent of informants made regular reference to regulatory and professional codes of practice, with an even smaller percentage quoting specific sections from these codes. A slightly larger group (15–20 per cent) made fairly regular reference to their agency's policy documents. However, a clear majority relied on their own sense of what is appropriate or inappropriate, and made their judgements with no reference to any formal guidance. Agency guidance tended to ignore the ambiguous areas of practice and seemed to act as an insurance policy, brought out and dusted off when something goes awry. The authors caution against ever-increasing bullet points of advice and prescription, and advance a notion of ethical engagement in which professionals exercise their ethical senses through regular discussion of professional boundary dilemmas

The caregiving experience: How much do health professionals understand?

Legal, social and economic factors have changed the delivery of care to people who have a mental disorder. Many of these people are now treated in the community and they live with or in close proximity to their family. The aim of this paper is to provide health professionals with an insight into the experience of being a caregiver to a person with a mental disorder. For these families caregiving becomes an integral part of everyday life.Positive outcomes for both the caregiver and the ill family member are more likely to occur when effective levels of collaboration exist between health professionals and caregivers. Collaboration is enhanced when caregivers and health professionals value each other's contribution to the ill family member's care. Often the burden, stress, and socio-economic effects on the family caring for a person with mental illness is not sufficiently appreciated and further increases this burden. A review of the literature from the caregiver's perception is presented. An increased understanding of the caregiving experience will enable health professionals to develop and implement strategies that facilitate positive outcomes for the caregiver and the ill family member

Reclaiming the humanity in personality Disorder.

This paper provides a commentary upon the nursing care of individuals diagnosed with personality disorder and associated education courses. The discussion focuses upon recent policy trends in the UK as a point of departure. This policy discourse is critical of mainstream mental health services in previously operating to exclude such individuals. One of the consequences has been a recent growth in interest in relevant training courses, many of which devote significant attention to staff attitudes regarding this client group. Various previous researchers and commentators have remarked upon the implications for practice of a perceived negative attitude among care staff. We reflect upon our own anecdotal experience of developing and delivering new university-based courses for practitioners working in the field of personality disorder to offer a particular critique of the UK context, in which this policy, training, and practice is framed. Social constructionist theories are drawn on to offer insights into public and practitioner discourse and the possible effects on therapeutic relationships. The available discourse constructs individuals with a diagnosis of personality disorder as essentially different from other people. We argue that staff training and practice development initiatives are likely to be more successful if such discourse is challenged, and attempts are made in therapeutic encounters to recognize shared characteristics and positive attributes as much as perceived difference and negative attributes. We refer to this as a re-engagement with common humanity. Despite the singular national context, the discursive themes explored are not necessarily restricted to the UK

A mixed-methods study exploring the characteristics and needs of long-stay patients in high and medium secure settings in England: implications for service organisation

Background: Forensic psychiatric services provide care for those with mental disorders and offending behaviour. Concerns have been expressed that patients may stay for too long in too high levels of security. The economic burden of these services is high, and they are highly restrictive for patients. There is no agreed standard for ‘long stay’; we defined a length of stay exceeding 5 years in medium secure care, 10 years in high secure care or 15 years in a combination of both settings as long stay. Objectives: To (1) estimate the number of long-stay patients in secure settings; (2) describe patients’ characteristics, needs and care pathways and the reasons for their prolonged stay; (3) identify patients’ perceptions of their treatment and quality of life; and (4) explore stakeholders’ views on long stay. Design: A mixed-methods approach, including a cross-sectional survey (on 1 April 2013) of all patients in participating units to identify long-stay patients [work package (WP) 1], file reviews and consultant questionnaires for long-stay patients (WP2), interviews with patients (WP3) and focus groups with other stakeholders (WP4). Setting: All three high secure hospitals and 23 medium secure units (16 NHS and 9 independent providers) in England. Participants: Information was gathered on all patients in participating units (WP1), from which 401 long-stay patients were identified (WP2), 40 patients (WP3), 17 international and 31 UK experts were interviewed and three focus groups were held (WP4). Results: Approximately 23.5% of high secure patients and 18% of medium secure patients were long-stay patients. We estimated that there are currently about 730 forensic long-stay patients in England. The source of a patient’s admission and the current section of the Mental Health Act [Great Britain. Mental Health Act 1983 (as Amended by the Mental Health Act 2007). London: The Stationery Office; 2007] under which they were admitted predicted long-stay status. Long-stay patients had complex pathways, moving ‘around’ between settings rather than moving forward. They were most likely to be detained under a hospital order with restrictions (section 37/41) and to have disturbed backgrounds with previous psychiatric admissions, self-harm and significant offending histories. The most common diagnosis was schizophrenia, but 47% had been diagnosed with personality disorder. Only 50% had current formal psychological therapies. The rates of violent incidents within institutions and seclusion were high, and a large proportion had unsuccessful referrals to less secure settings. Most patients had some contact with their families. We identified five classes of patients within the long-stay sample with different characteristics. Patients differed in their attribution of reasons for long stay (internal/external), outlook (positive/negative), approach (active/passive) and readiness for change. Other countries have successfully developed specific long-stay services; however, UK experts were reluctant to accept the reality of long stay and that the medical model of ‘cure’ does not work with this group. Limitations: We did not conduct file reviews on non-long-stay patients; therefore, we cannot say which factors differentiate between long-stay patients and non-long-stay patients. Conclusions: The number of long-stay patients in England is high, resulting in high resource use. Significant barriers were identified in developing designated long-stay services. Without a national strategy, these issues are likely to remain. Future work: To compare long-stay patients and non-long-stay patients. To evaluate new service models specifically designed for long-stay patients. Study registration: The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Clinical Research Network Portfolio 129376. Funding: The NIHR Health Services and Delivery Research programm