What Worked for Me: Patient Pespective of Recovery in High Secure
Research type
Research Study
Full title
What Worked for Me: Patient Perspective of Recovery in High Secure
IRAS ID
284504
Contact name
Kevin Kerr
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
Mersey Care NHS Trust
Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier
2020/23, Research number
Duration of Study in the UK
0 years, 7 months, 1 days
Research summary
Recovery in forensic mental health services includes two areas of recovery i) from mental health difficulties; and ii) offending behaviour. This indicates that recovery in this area has a greater level of complexity than recovery in general mental health services. In order for patients to progress from high secure hospital they need to have experienced some recovery in terms of clinical symptoms and reduced their risk of offending.
research into recovery is dominated by general health and mental health services. Exploration into recovery in forensic mental health has rarely been explored, with existing research mainly focusing on the views of professionals or using rather simple methods. This has overlooked the complexity of the unique and personal nature of recovery. There is a clear gap in the literature to explore the experience of the recovery process from the voice of the patient. This can be done through the use of qualitative methodology, which allows for a exploration of the patient perspective, adding another dimension to the understanding of recovery so far. The negative association that can occur with having a severe mental illness and criminal conviction can create a societal response such as stigma that can negatively impact one's identity. This means that successful recovery relies upon achieving an identity that is socially accepted by others. Little is currently understood about the identity of individuals who have progressed to a stage where they will be discharged from a high secure environment. For patients ready to transfer out of a high secure hospital, it could be assumed that their identity has evolved to a degree any negative labels have shifted. It is essential to explore this from the perspective of the patient.REC name
North West - Greater Manchester East Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
20/NW/0318
Date of REC Opinion
17 Sep 2020
REC opinion
Further Information Favourable Opinion