Author
Listed:
- Richard Laugharne
- Stefan Priebe
- Rose McCabe
- Natasha Garland
- Damian Clifford
Abstract
Background: Trust, choice and power are critical issues in clinical practice, public policies and a post-modern understanding of mental health care. We aimed to investigate the experiences and attitudes of patients with psychosis in relation to trust, choice and power. Method: We conducted 20 in-depth interviews with patients with psychotic disorders in care of NHS services. The interviews were subjected to thematic analysis. Discussion: Patients discussed aspects of their care in terms of dimensions that enhance or undermine trust, choice and power. Two interpretive themes emerged from this data. First, patients perceive the need for a shifting balance of power, according to the severity of their illness and their own experience of care, but feel that threats of coercion and neglect disable them. Second, they appreciate the expertise of clinicians, but particularly value ‘the personal touch’ that goes beyond this expertise, including personal disclosure about their own lives, common acts of kindness and conversation outside clinical matters. Patients view trust as a two-way process with responsibility shared between patient and clinician. Conclusions: The active involvement of patients with psychosis in their individual care may be strengthened, particularly when they are not acutely ill and have more experience of their illness. While patients value expertise and respect in interactions with clinicians, they also appreciate a ‘personal touch’, which may go beyond current notions of professionalism.
Suggested Citation
Richard Laugharne & Stefan Priebe & Rose McCabe & Natasha Garland & Damian Clifford, 2012.
"Trust, choice and power in mental health care: Experiences of patients with psychosis,"
International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 58(5), pages 496-504, September.
Handle:
RePEc:sae:socpsy:v:58:y:2012:i:5:p:496-504
DOI: 10.1177/0020764011408658
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:socpsy:v:58:y:2012:i:5:p:496-504. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.