“I used to think that they were all abnormal. And I was the normal one”: conceptualizing mental health and mental health treatment under Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT)

Background: Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) was introduced in the United Kingdom in 2006 to provide more effective and efficient services to people experiencing mild to moderate mental ill health. The model represents a paradigm shift in how we provide psychological care to large populations. Aims: We wanted to document how the IAPT programme impacted on patients’ understanding of their mental health, and mental health treatment. Methods: We used Foucauldian Discourse Analysis to analyse six semi-structured research interviews with patients from one IAPT service in a major UK city. Results: Participants constructed their mental health problems as individual pathologies. Constructions of mental health and of treatment evidenced the privileging of personal responsibility and social productivity over dependency on others and the state. Conclusions: Services are functioning well for some. The role of IAPT in pathologising those who are dependent on people and services requires further commentary and action. Declaration of interest: The first author was employed by the same organisation that delivered the IAPT service, although through a separate staffing and management line.

‘Disability and HIV in Africa: Breaking the barriers to sexual health care’

Three decades in to the HIV pandemic, the issues affecting people with disabilities remains less known. Increasing attention has been given to this overlooked population when it comes to HIV prevention, treatment and care. This is related to the significant unmet sexual and reproductive health care needs facing people with disabilities worldwide. This article discusses the barriers to sexual health for people with disabilities in Africa, and presents an argument about how mainstream HIV prevention work and research does not adequately attend to the sorts of systemic barriers that exclude people with disabilities, which a more targeted, and critical approach could.

Heterotopias of mental health care: The role of space in experiences of distress, madness and mental health service use.

The change from an institutional to community care model of mental health services can be seen as a fundamental spatial change in the lives of service users (Payne, 1999; Symonds & Kelly, 1998; Wolch & Philo, 2000). It has been argued that little attention has been paid to the experience of the specific sites of mental health care, due to a utopic (idealised and placeless) idea of ‘community’ present in ‘community care’ (Symonds, 1998). This project hence explored the role of space in service users’ experiences, both of mental health care, and community living. Seventeen ‘spatial interviews’ with service users, utilising participatory mapping techniques (Gould & White, 1974; Herlihy & Knapp, 2003; Pain & Francis, 2003), plus seven, already published first person narratives of distress (Hornstein, 2009), were analysed using thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Mental health service sites are argued to have been described as heterotopias (Foucault, 1986a) of a ‘control society’ (Deleuze, 1992), dominated by observation and the administration of risk (Rose, 1998a), which can in turn be seen to make visible (Hetherington, 2011) to service users a passive and stigmatised subject position (Scheff, 1974; 1999). Such visible positioning can be seen to ‘modulate’ (Deleuze, 1992) participants’ experiences in mainstream space. The management of space has hence been argued to be a central issue in the production and management of distress and madness in the community, both in terms of a differential experience of spaces as ‘concordant’ or ‘discordant’ with distress, and with movement through space being described as a key mediator of experiences of distress. It is argued that this consideration of space has profound implications for the ‘social inclusion’ agenda (Spandler, 2007; Wallcraft, 2001).

A critical narrative analysis of shared decision-making in acute, inpatient mental health care

Shared decision-making (SDM) is a high priority in healthcare policy and is complementary to the recovery philosophy in mental health care. This agenda has been operationalised within the Values-Based Practice (VBP) framework, which offers a theoretical and practical model to promote democratic interprofessional approaches to decision-making. However, these are limited by a lack of recognition of the implications of power implicit within the mental health system. This study considers issues of power within the context of decision-making and examines to what extent decisions about patients? care on acute in-patient wards are perceived to be shared. Focus groups were conducted with 46 mental health professionals, service users, and carers. The data were analysed using the framework of critical narrative analysis (CNA). The findings of the study suggested each group constructed different identity positions, which placed them as inside or outside of the decision-making process. This reflected their view of themselves as best placed to influence a decision on behalf of the service user. In conclusion, the discourse of VBP and SDM needs to take account of how differentials of power and the positioning of speakers affect the context in which decisions take place.