Collaboration between home care staff, leaders and care partners of older people with mental health problems: A focus on personhood

Aim: To explore home care staff and leaders’ experiences of collaborating with care partners of older people with mental health problems through a personhood perspective.Background: Collaboration with care partners is a political aim in recent white papers in Norway and internationally. Home care services regularly work closely with care partners, but there are many indications that the collaboration does not work satisfactorily.Methods: The study had a qualitative design and comprised eight health professionals in two focus groups and in-depth interviews with three leaders in one home care district. The data were analysed using a thematic framework analysis building on previous research on personhood. COREQ reporting guidelines were used to ensure comprehensive reporting.Results: Four themes were identified in the analysis: ‘Non-negotiated relationships’, Contradictory agendas’, ‘Weak paternalism’ and ‘Moral compromise’.Conclusion: There seems to be a lack of facilitation of collaborative relationships through all levels of the home care organisation. The interactions between care partners and home care staff sometimes appear to produce low or negative levels of emotional energy, and situations where the personhood of neither of them is respected occurs. Paying attention to the four modes of being as a framework for understanding personhood, creates the foundation for a person-centred approach that enhances the potential of creating stronger partnership in care relationships.https://doi.org/10.1111/scs.1271434pubpub

Stigmatising attitude of medical students towards a psychiatry label

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licens

Resolving the paradox of shame: differentiating among specific appraisal-feeling combinations explains pro-social and self-defensive motivation

Research has shown that people can respond both self-defensively and pro-socially when they experience shame. We address this paradox by differentiating among specific appraisals (of specific self-defect and concern for condemnation) and feelings (of shame, inferiority, and rejection) often reported as part of shame. In two Experiments (Study 1: N = 85; Study 2: N = 112), manipulations that put participants’ social-image at risk increased their appraisal of concern for condemnation. In Study 2, a manipulation of moral failure increased participants’ appraisal that they suffered a specific self-defect. In both studies, mediation analyses showed that effects of the social-image at risk manipulation on self-defensive motivation were explained by appraisal of concern for condemnation and felt rejection. In contrast, the effect of the moral failure manipulation on pro-social motivation in Study 2 was explained by appraisal of a specific self-defect and felt shame. Thus, distinguishing among the appraisals and feelings tied to shame enabled clearer prediction of pro-social and self-defensive responses to moral failure with and without risk to social-image

Part-time hospitalisation and stigma experiences: a study in contemporary psychiatric hospitals

Background: Because numerous studies have revealed the negative consequences of stigmatisation, this study explores the determinants of stigma experiences. In particular, it examines whether or not part-time hospitalisation in contemporary psychiatric hospitals is associated with less stigma experiences than full-time hospitalisation. Methods: Survey data on 378 clients of 42 wards from 8 psychiatric hospitals are used to compare full-time clients, part-time clients and clients receiving part-time care as aftercare on three dimensions of stigma experiences, while controlling for symptoms, diagnosis and clients' background characteristics. Results: The results reveal that part-time clients without previous full-time hospitalisation report less social rejection than clients who receive full-time hospitalisation. In contrast, clients receiving part-time treatment as aftercare do not differ significantly from full-time clients concerning social rejection. No significant results for the other stigma dimensions were found. Conclusion: Concerning social rejection, immediate part-time hospitalisation could be recommended as a means of destigmatisation for clients of contemporary psychiatric hospitals

Social capital in relation to depression, musculoskeletal pain, and psychosomatic symptoms: a cross-sectional study of a large population-based cohort of Swedish adolescents

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Social capital has lately received much attention in health research. The present study investigated whether two measures of subjective social capital were related to psychosomatic symptoms, musculoskeletal pain, and depression in a large population of Swedish adolescents.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A total of 7757 13-18 year old students anonymously completed the Survey of Adolescent Life in Vestmanland 2008 which included questions on sociodemographic background, neighbourhood social capital, general social trust, and ill health.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Low neighbourhood social capital and low general social trust were associated with higher rates of psychosomatic symptoms, musculoskeletal pain, and depression. Individuals with low general social trust had more than three times increased odds of being depressed, three times increased odds of having many psychosomatic symptoms, and double the odds of having many symptoms of musculoskeletal pain.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The findings make an important contribution to the social capital - health debate by demonstrating relations between social capital factors and self-reported ill health in a young population.</p

Contesting the psychiatric framing of ME / CFS

ME/CFS is a medically contested illness and its understanding, framing and treatment has been the subject of heated debate. This paper examines why framing the condition as a psychiatric issue—what we refer to as ‘psychiatrisation’—has been so heavily contested by patients and activists. We argue that this contestation is not simply about stigmatising mental health conditions, as some have suggested, but relates to how people diagnosed with mental illness are treated in society, psychiatry and the law. We highlight the potentially harmful consequences of psychiatrisation which can lead to people’s experiential knowledge being discredited. This stems, in part, from a psychiatric-specific form of ‘epistemic injustice’ which can result in unhelpful, unwanted and forced treatments. This understanding helps explain why the psychiatrisation of ME/CFS has become the focus of such bitter debate and why psychiatry itself has become such a significant field of contention, for both ME/CFS patients and mental health service users/survivors. Notwithstanding important differences, both reject the way psychiatry denies patient explanations and understandings, and therefore share a collective struggle for justice and legitimation. Reasons why this shared struggle has not resulted in alliances between ME and mental health activists are noted