Cited by 7Mental Health and Patient InvolvementHealthcare Decision-Making and RestraintsPsychiatric care and mental health services

Self-determination: what do people who experience severe mental illness want from public mental health services?

Open access
Mattner, Sandra, Ehrlich, Carolyn, Chester, Polly, Crompton, David, Kendall, Elizabeth·2017·International Journal of Integrated Care

Abstract

Introduction: If people who experience severe and enduring mental illness are to experience recovery, the health care context in which they engage needs to foster human rights, self-determination and social inclusion. This qualitative research aims to advance understanding about processes that influence self-determination by engaging and involving people who experience mental illness in meaningful conversations about how health care systems impact recovery.Theory / Methods: People over age 18 who experience severe mental illness and who were living in South East Queensland were recruited through community-based mental illness support organisations. 42 people participated in five semi-structured group interviews. Digitally recorded interviews were transcribed verbatim. In conjunction with the theoretical lens of self-determination theory, principles of thematic analysis were used to code and categorise data. Emergent themes were constantly compared until the most parsimonious themes that accounted for all data were identified. Approval to conduct the study was obtained from relevant Human Research Ethics Committees.Results: People indicated that being engaged in their care was central to the experience that they desired from a safe health care system, yet actual experiences differed. People also emphasised the need for accurate, empathic communication; the importance of building and maintaining trust-based relationships; integration and continuity of care between providers and sectors within the health care system; and gaining access to care when and as needed.Discussion: People who experience severe mental illness understood that achieving autonomy in high-risk mental illness situations was tricky; that in some circumstances there were valid reasons for autonomy and self-determination to be thwarted. However, unreflective use of blanket restrictive practices without providing reasonable alternative activities disabled them. People wanted to be engaged in their care; with health professionals in autonomy supportive ways; and with health and social support networks that assisted in recovery.Conclusion: Overall, people who experience severe mental illness want individual health professionals and the collective health care system to engage them in their care. However, they often found that restricted access to adequate, timely and well-integrated support left them feeling disempowered.Lessons learned: Responsive health professionals in integrated health care systems that engage people in a person-centred manner are fundamental for recovery and to the fulfilment of their basic psychological needs: autonomy, connectedness and competence.Limitations: A small number of participants for a single geographic area limit the generalizability of this study. Additionally, participants may have engaged in the research because they had a high level of interest in sharing their experiences, and the opinions of other people who were less invested in their care is unknown. In a group interview situation, they may not have felt comfortable to express to express their full range of experience.Future research: Self-determination theory is primarily a theory of motivation. Further study needs to be undertaken to understand the motivational influences that impact how health professionals engage people who experience severe mental illness.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5334/ijic.3162

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Autonomy is a signal of both positive mental health and recovery from mental illness.

    “As attested in the literature, autonomy is a signal of both positive mental health and, where mental illness has previously supervened, recovery from such illness [75, 76].”

    From Five studies evaluating the impact on mental health and mood of recalling, reading, and discussing fiction (2022) · cites this paper as [75]

    The Discussion and Lessons learned (p. 2) link autonomy-supportive care and the fulfilment of autonomy as a basic psychological need with recovery among people experiencing severe mental illness. They do not describe autonomy as a signal of recovery or address it as a signal of positive mental health generally. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Of the three VAD variables, dominance is probably the one most explicitly connected with well-being.

    “Of the three VAD variables, dominance is probably the one most explicitly connected with well-being.”

    From Five studies evaluating the impact on mental health and mood of recalling, reading, and discussing fiction (2022) · cites this paper as [75]

    The Introduction and Discussion (p. 2) discuss self-determination, autonomy and recovery in mental health care. Searches for VAD variables and dominance in relation to well-being found no passage comparing dominance with the other VAD variables, so our copy does not address the claim. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Authors
Mattner, S., Ehrlich, C., Chester, P., Crompton, D., & Kendall, E.
Affiliations
Griffith University (AU)
Corresponding author
Kendall, Elizabeth
Venue
International Journal of Integrated Care
Published
2017-07-11
Volume
17
Issue
3
Pages
50
ISSN
1568-4156 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2735882919
Cited by
7
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2018: 1
FWCI
0.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Integrated Care (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • International Journal of Integrated Care (IJIC) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mental Health and Patient Involvement
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Healthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
Keywords
self-determination theory, severe mental illness, public mental health services, patient engagement, autonomy, restrictive practices, person-centred care, integrated care, continuity of care, trust in healthcare providers, health care access, recovery, social inclusion, human rights, basic psychological needs, disempowerment, lived experience of mental illness, South East Queensland

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