Contested understandings of recovery in mental health
Abstract
Background The concept of recovery is contested throughout the existing literature and in mental health services. Little research exists that gives voice to service user perspectives of recovery. Aim This paper explores how service users in two recovery oriented services run by the National Health Service in North West England talked about recovery and what it meant to them. Method 14 service users accessing these services took part in semi-structured qualitative interviews focusing on the concept of recovery. Data were analysed using an interpretive phenomenological analysis approach. Results Service users talked about recovery as a dynamic, day to day process as well as an outcome; specifically related to being discharged from inpatient settings. A number of factors including relationships and medication were cited to have the potential to make or break recovery. Conclusions The study highlights the continued dominance of the biomedical model in mental health services. Service users appear to have internalised staff and services' understanding of recovery perhaps unsurprisingly given the power differential in these relationships. Implications for clinical practice are explored.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Recovery was not a single state of being but a complex mix of the past, the here and now and, the future.
“Recovery was not a single state of being but a complex mix of the past, the here and now and, the future (60).”
From Recovery from Severe Mental Health Problems: A Systematic Review of Service User and Informal Caregiver Perspectives (2021) · cites this paper as [60]
McCabe et al. pointed out in forensic mental health services "everyday activities such as walking and discussing books were talked about in the language of therapies administered by services. The 'reader group' and the 'walking group' were all discussed in terms of therapeutic interventions rather than fulfilling hobbies that people adopt in everyday life."
“McCabe et al. (60) pointed out in forensic mental health services “everyday activities such as walking and discussing books were talked about in the language of therapies administered by services. The ‘reader group’ and the ‘walking group’ were all discussed in terms of therapeutic interventions rather than fulfilling hobbies that people adopt in everyday life.””
From Recovery from Severe Mental Health Problems: A Systematic Review of Service User and Informal Caregiver Perspectives (2021) · cites this paper as [60]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 27 · Cited by 48
- Authors
- McCabe, R., Whittington, R., Cramond, L., & Perkins, E.
- Affiliations
- University of Liverpool (GB)
- Corresponding author
- McCabe, Rhiannah
- Venue
- Journal of Mental Health
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2018-05-17
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 475-481
- ISSN
- 0963-8237 (ISSN-L)
- 1360-0567
- OpenAlex
- W2804753461
- Cited by
- 48
- References
- 27
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4
- FWCI
- 7.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Mental Health (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Administration for Community Living
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mental Health and Patient Involvement
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
- Keywords
- recovery, mental health service users, service user perspectives, recovery-oriented services, hospital discharge, biomedical model, medication, therapeutic relationship, power relations, mental health services
- MeSH terms
- Mental Health Recovery, Mental Disorders, Female, Humans, Male, Mental Health Services, Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care, Persons with Psychiatric Disorders, Mentally Ill Persons, Qualitative Research
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review