Applying the recovery approach to the interface between mental health and child protection services

There are a range of theoretical approaches which may inform the interface between child protection and adult mental health services. These theoretical perspectives tend to be focused on either child protection or mental health with no agreed integrating framework. The interface continues to be identified, in research, case management reviews and inquiry reports, as complex and problematic. This paper proposes that more positive, integrated approaches to service user engagement, risk assessment and management may lead to better outcomes in working with families experiencing parental mental health problems and child protection concerns. It is proposed that the recovery approach, increasingly used in mental health services, can inform the processes of engagement, assessment and intervention at the mental health and child protection interface. The article provides a critical overview of the recovery approach and compares it with approaches typifying interventions in child protection work to date. Relevant research and inquiries are also examined as a context for how to more effectively respond to cases where there are issues around parental mental health problems and child protection. The article concludes with case material to illustrate the potential application of the recovery approach to the interface between mental health and child protection services.

Bullying Experiences of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service-users: A Pilot Survey

Victims and perpetrators of bullying experience a variety of psychological problems. The aim of the current pilot study was to explore the bullying experiences of Child and Adolescent Mental Health (CAMHS) service-users. The investigation was conducted as a cross-sectional survey at a community-based specialist CAMH service. A modified version of the Revised Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire was used to assess bullying experiences. Participants comprised an opportunity sample of 26 adolescent male and female CAMH service-users. Results indicated that 61.5% of participants reported being bullied. Clear links were made between being bullied and the mental health of participants, with 62.5% of bullied participants reporting that being bullied was a ‘‘moderately importantvery important’’ reason for their attendance at the CAMH service. Therapists at the CAMH service made appropriate enquiries about young people being victims of bullying, but more enquiries could be made about young peoples’ experiences as perpetrators. Service-users favoured therapist-led bullying interventions such as assertiveness training, therapy and/or psychological coping strategies, and social skills training. These findings underline the need for ecological approaches to dealing with bullying, and suggest that CAMH services could play an important role in establishing and supporting such interventions.

Using administrative data to understand mental health in Northern Ireland:Results from two exemplar projects

Mental health is unevenly distributed in the Northern Ireland population. Administrative data on psychotropic medication prescribing is increasingly being used in research into population mental health. This paper illustrates how these data indicate concentrations of poor mental health in Northern Ireland, e.g. within deprived neighbourhoods, at interfaces, among older persons admitted to care homes and among persons bereaved through sudden death or suicide. This briefing also aims to widen the debate about mental health from a disorder/service paradigm to a whole population approach.

The Family Model - A transgenerational approach to mental health in families: personal, clinical, educational, research, systems and policy perspectives

The Family Model – A transgenerational approach to mental health in families This workshop will provide an overview on The Family Model (TFM) and its use in promoting and facilitating a trans­generational family focus in Mental Health services, over the past 10­ - 15 years. Each of the speakers will address a different perspective, including service user/consumer, clinical practice, education & training, research and policy. Adrian Falkov (chair) will provide an overview of TFM to set the scene and a ‘policy to practice’ perspective, based on use of TFM in Australia. Author: Heide Lloyd. The Family Model ­ A personal (consumer/patient) perspective | United Kingdom Heide will provide a description of her experiences as a child, adult, parent & grandparent, using TFM as the structure around which to ‘weave’ her story and demonstrate how TFM has assisted her in understanding the impact of symptoms on her & family and how she has used it in her management of symptoms and recovery (personal perspective). The Family Model ­ Education & training perspective ­ Marie Diggins | United Kingdom PhD Bente Weimand | Norway Authors: ­ Marie Diggins | United Kingdom PhD Bente Weimand | Norway This combined (UK & Norwegian) presentation will cover historical background to TFM and its use in eLearning (the Social Care Institute for Excellence)and a number of other UK initiatives, together with a description of the postgraduate masters course at the University Oslo/Akershus, using TFM. The Family Model ­ A research perspective PhD Anne Grant | Northern Ireland Author: PhD Anne Grant | Ireland Anne Grant will describe how she used TFM as the theoretical framework for her PhD looking at family focused (nursing) practice in Ireland. The Family Model ­ A service systems perspective ­ Mary Donaghy | Northern Ireland Authors: PhD Adrian Falkov | Australia ­ Mary Donaghy | N Ireland Mary Donaghy will discuss how TFM has been used to support & facilitate a cross service ‘whole of system’ change program in Belfast (NI) to achieve improved family focused practice. She will demonstrate its utility in achieving a broader approach to service design, delivery and evaluation.

Mental Health and Morbidity of Caregivers and Co-Residents of individuals with Dementia: A Quasi-Experimental Design

Objectives: To determine if providing informal care to a co-resident with dementia symptoms places an additional risk on the likelihood of poor mental health or mortality compared to co-resident non-caregivers.
Design: A quasi-experimental design of caregiving and non-caregiving co-residents of individuals with dementia symptoms, providing a natural comparator for the additive effects of caregiving on top of living with an individual with dementia symptoms. 
Methods: Census records, providing information on household structure, intensity of caregiving, presence of dementia symptoms and self-reported mental health, were linked to mortality records over the following 33 months. Multi-level regression models were constructed to determine the risk of poor mental health and death in co-resident caregivers of individuals with dementia symptoms compared to co-resident non-caregivers, adjusting for the clustering of individuals within households.
Results: The cohort consisted of 10,982 co-residents (55.1% caregivers), with 12.1% of non-caregivers reporting poor mental health compared to 8.4% of intense caregivers (>20 hours of care per week). During follow-up the cohort experienced 560 deaths (245 to caregivers). Overall, caregiving co-residents were at no greater risk of poor mental health but had lower mortality risk than non-caregiving co-residents (ORadj=0.93, 95% CI 0.79, 1.10 and ORadj=0.67, 95% CI 0.56, 0.81, respectively); this lower mortality risk was also seen amongst the most intensive caregivers (ORadj=0.65, 95% CI 0.53, 0.79).
Conclusion: Caregiving poses no additional risk to mental health over and above the risk associated with merely living with someone with dementia, and is associated with a lower mortality risk compared to non-caregiving co-residents.