TY - JOUR
T1 - Social recovery
T2 - a new interpretation to recovery-orientated services – a critical literature review
AU - Norton, Michael John
AU - Swords, Calvin
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020, Emerald Publishing Limited.
PY - 2021/1/13
Y1 - 2021/1/13
N2 - Purpose: In 2020, the significance of “lived experience” and “service user” accounts of recovery has become central to the delivery of mental health policy and practice. Reflecting on the first known account of personal recovery in the late-20th century provided new hope and encouragement that those living with mental illness could live a fulfilling life. Taking this into consideration, the purpose of this paper is to explore the relevance to this experience of those using services today. Design/methodology/approach: The authors present a critical literature review, which is underpinned by a systematic approach adopted from Higgins and Pinkerton (1998). This involved a six-step approach seeking to answer the question – What are the service users’ views on the recovery concept within mental health services? Findings: The conceptualisation of recovery continues to focus on biomedical parameters. A new interpretation of recovery is beginning to materialise: social recovery. This new interpretation appears to be achievable through six key influencers: health, economics, social interaction/connection, housing, personal relationships and support. Originality/value: Building on Ramon’s (2018) argument regarding the need for mental health policy to focus on the concept of social recovery, this study extends on this proposition by providing a foundational evidence base. More specifically, it not only supports the need for this shift in policy but also identifies a new interpretation building in practice. Furthermore, the authors highlight six key pillars that could potentially shape such provisions for policy.
AB - Purpose: In 2020, the significance of “lived experience” and “service user” accounts of recovery has become central to the delivery of mental health policy and practice. Reflecting on the first known account of personal recovery in the late-20th century provided new hope and encouragement that those living with mental illness could live a fulfilling life. Taking this into consideration, the purpose of this paper is to explore the relevance to this experience of those using services today. Design/methodology/approach: The authors present a critical literature review, which is underpinned by a systematic approach adopted from Higgins and Pinkerton (1998). This involved a six-step approach seeking to answer the question – What are the service users’ views on the recovery concept within mental health services? Findings: The conceptualisation of recovery continues to focus on biomedical parameters. A new interpretation of recovery is beginning to materialise: social recovery. This new interpretation appears to be achievable through six key influencers: health, economics, social interaction/connection, housing, personal relationships and support. Originality/value: Building on Ramon’s (2018) argument regarding the need for mental health policy to focus on the concept of social recovery, this study extends on this proposition by providing a foundational evidence base. More specifically, it not only supports the need for this shift in policy but also identifies a new interpretation building in practice. Furthermore, the authors highlight six key pillars that could potentially shape such provisions for policy.
KW - Lived experience
KW - Mental health
KW - Peer support
KW - Policy
KW - Social recovery
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85094649495&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1108/JMHTEP-06-2020-0035
DO - 10.1108/JMHTEP-06-2020-0035
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85094649495
VL - 16
SP - 7
EP - 20
JO - The Journal of Mental Health Training, Education and Practice
JF - The Journal of Mental Health Training, Education and Practice
SN - 1755-6228
IS - 1
ER -