The therapeutic relationship in the context of involuntary treatment orders: The perspective of nurses and patients
Abstract
WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: Involuntary treatment orders are increasingly being used around the world to allow the treatment of individuals living with a mental illness deemed incapable of giving consent and who are actively refusing treatment. The use of involuntary treatment orders can impact the nurse-patient therapeutic relationship, which is essential to offer quality care and promote recovery. WHAT THE PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: Nurses and patients do not agree on the possibility to develop a therapeutic relationship, with nurses believing they can build a bond with the patients despite the challenges imposed by the involuntary treatment order, and patients rejecting this possibility. Nurses caring for patients on involuntary treatment orders feel obligated to apply the conditions of this measure, even if it damages the relationship with their patients. This difficult aspect of their work leads them to question their role in relation to the management of involuntary treatment orders. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: Nurses need to be aware of the reasons why patients on involuntary treatment orders do not believe in the possibility of building a therapeutic relationship. Nurses need to reflect on and express their concerns about the damaging effects that managing involuntary treatment orders conditions can have on the nurse-patient therapeutic relationship. ABSTRACT: Introduction Involuntary treatment orders (ITO) can impact the nurse-patient therapeutic relationship (TR) negatively. Despite the increasing use of ITOs around the world, few studies have explored their influence on the TR from the perspectives of nurses and patients. Aim To describe the TR in the context of ITOs as reported by nurses and individuals living with a mental illness. Method Secondary data analysis of qualitative interviews with nurses (n = 9) and patients (n = 6) was performed using content analysis. Results Participants described the TR as fundamentally embedded in a power imbalance amplified by the ITO, which was discussed through the conflicting roles of nurses, the legal constraints imposed on patients and nurses, the complex relation between the ITO and the TR, and the influence of mental healthcare settings' context. Discussion Nurses and patients' views were opposed, questioning the authenticity of the relationship. Implications for Practice Nurses should be aware of the patients' lack of faith in the TR to ensure that they are sensitive to patients' behaviours that may falsely suggest that a relationship is established. Further studies should explore ways to alleviate the burden of the management of ITOs on nurses and allow for a trusting relationship to be build.
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?
Providing involuntary psychiatric admission and treatment has a negative emotional and psychological impact on healthcare professionals.
“Similarly, studies have found that the experience of providing involuntary psychiatric admission and treatment has a negative emotional and psychological impact on healthcare professionals [48].”
From “Backed into a Corner”: Lived experiences of receiving and providing involuntary psychiatric treatment under British Columbia’s Mental Health Act (2026) · cites this paper as [48]
Involuntary psychiatric admission and treatment negatively impacts trust of healthcare providers.
“negatively impacting trust of healthcare providers [48]”
From “Backed into a Corner”: Lived experiences of receiving and providing involuntary psychiatric treatment under British Columbia’s Mental Health Act (2026) · cites this paper as [48]
Although each professional's approach does influence how care is perceived and the extent to which it is experienced as coercive, the literature also highlights that healthcare workers are trapped within systems that prevent them from intervening in ways that align with their professional values.
“Although each professional’s approach does influence how care is perceived and the extent to which it is experienced as coercive [47,83,153], the literature also highlights that healthcare workers are trapped within systems that prevent them from intervening in ways that align with their professional values, which are centered on supporting, not controlling, the person [181,182,183].”
From Factors Associated with Perceived Coercion in Adults Receiving Psychiatric Care: A Scoping Review (2025) · cites this paper as [182]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 38 · Cited by 24
- Authors
- Lessard‐Deschênes, C., & Goulet, M.
- Affiliations
- Institut universitaire en santé mentale de Montréal (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Lessard‐Deschênes, Clara
- Venue
- Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2021-10
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 287-296
- ISSN
- 1351-0126 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2850
- OpenAlex
- W3199588619
- Cited by
- 24
- References
- 38
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3
- FWCI
- 1.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Papyrus : Institutional Repository (Université de Montréal) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Canadian Institutes of Health Research (271224)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Healthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Ethics in medical practice
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
- Keywords
- mental illness, power imbalance, treatment refusal, nurses' perceptions, patient perspectives, psychiatric nursing
- MeSH terms
- Involuntary Treatment, Mental Disorders, Humans, Nurse-Patient Relations
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