Whose decision is it anyway? A qualitative study of user participation and how clinicians deal with the patient perspective in mental healthcare. Issue 4 (12th December 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Mathisen, Vår; Lorem, Geir Fagerheim; Obstfelder, Aud; Måseide, Per
• Is Part Of: Mental health review. Volume 21:Issue 4(2016)
• Page Start: 249
• Page End: 260
• Publication Date: 2016-12-12
• Subjects: Qualitative research -- Communication -- User participation -- Decision-making process -- Mental healthcare; Mental health services -- Great Britain -- Periodicals; Mental health -- Periodicals; Mental Health Services -- Great Britain -- Periodicals; 362.20941
• DOI: 10.1108/MHRJ-01-2016-0003
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1361-9322

Abstract

Abstract : Purpose: The concept of user participation is well accepted internationally. Nevertheless, studies show that both patients and health professionals find it challenging to maintain patient-centred ideals in the context of severe mental illness. The purpose of this paper is to explore how professionals deal with the ideals in light of patients' right to participate in planning and decision making regarding milieu therapeutic measures and activities. Design/methodology/approach: This is a qualitative study with an interactionist approach based on fieldwork at three district psychiatric centres in Norway during 2011-2012. The observations focused on patient-staff interaction in milieu therapeutic activities. Interviews were based on observed situations. Findings: Adherence to treatment, rules and routines restricted patient autonomy. The professionals' practical orientation towards routines overrode the ideals of patients' rights. The staff regarded user participation primarily as participation in organised and mandatory activities. Refusal to comply was met with different sanctions, e.g. the prospect of being discharged. Originality/value: Although user participation calls for patient-centred approaches, there is some debate about the challenges and premises for cooperation with persons suffering from severe mental conditions. This study adds insight into the everyday organisational context that facilitates or impedes user participation. It helps to explain why the user perspective can be overlooked, thus providing important information to both clinicians and policy makers who aim to fulfil the patient's right to participate in planning and decision making regarding treatment and care.