Seclusion in the context of recovery-oriented practice: the perspectives and experiences of psychologists in Ireland

Author:

Stíobhairt Antaine,Cassidy Nicole,Clarke Niamh,Guerin Suzanne

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to explore the roles of psychologists in seclusion in adult mental health services in Ireland, their perspectives on seclusion and its use in recovery-oriented practice and related professional practice issues. Design/methodology/approach A qualitative hermeneutic phenomenological study was conducted from a social constructivist perspective. Semi-structured interviews with 17 psychologists were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Findings Twenty-four themes were identified, which were clustered into four overarching themes. Participants viewed themselves and psychology in Ireland more broadly as peripheral to seclusion. They believed that seclusion possessed no inherent therapeutic value but viewed it as an uncomfortable and multi-faceted reality. Participants regarded seclusion and recovery as largely inconsistent and difficult to reconcile, and they perceived systemic factors, which had a pervasive negative impact on seclusion and recovery in practice. Practical implications The findings highlight the perceived complexity of seclusion and its interface with recovery, and the need to conscientiously balance conflicting priorities that cannot be easily reconciled to ensure ethical practice. The findings suggest psychologists are well-suited to participate in local and national discussions on using seclusion in recovery-oriented practice. Originality/value This study offers a unique insight into psychologists’ perceptions of seclusion and considers the implications of these views. Participants’ nuanced views suggest that psychologists can make valuable contributions to local and national discussions on these topics.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Psychiatry and Mental health

Reference47 articles.

1. Ethical issues,1994

2. American Psychiatric Nurses Association (2018), “Position statement on the use of seclusion and restraint”, available at: www.apna.org/files/public/Resources/APNASeclusionRestraintPositionPaperRev2018.pdf (accessed 10 August 2022).

3. Eliminating seclusion and restraint in recovery-oriented crisis services;Psychiatric Services,2008

4. Being in a seclusion room: the forensic psychiatric inpatients' perspective;Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing,2020

5. Baker, S.E. and Edwards, R. (2012), “How many qualitative interviews is enough”, Discussion Paper [unpublished]. National Centre for Research Methods, available at: http://eprints.ncrm.ac.uk/2273/

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3