Homeless populations are a politically contentious problem and researchers struggle to achieve a balanced approach. They place emphasis on sharply contrasting factors, such as;…
Abstract
Purpose
Homeless populations are a politically contentious problem and researchers struggle to achieve a balanced approach. They place emphasis on sharply contrasting factors, such as; institutional structures, ideologies or individual dispositions and differences. Central questions remain unanswered, i.e., is homelessness an outcome of society’s failings related to housing shortages, or a personal choice, as in the status of “intentional homelessness?” The purpose of this paper is to set aside assumptions, to explore experiences of homelessness and psychosis.
Design/methodology/approach
An existentially informed hermeneutic phenomenological analysis; exploring transcribed narratives from semi-structured interviews with three men.
Findings
These participants started to wander as a spontaneous response to distressing life experiences. Without any plan they travelled to new locations living on the street. Being contained and treated against their will in the psychiatric system was another source of distress. They did not choose homelessness through a rational calculation of their best interests. They felt at odds with society, which did not protect them and failed to meet their needs.
Research limitations/implications
In qualitative research, findings are not generalisable to other settings.
Practical implications
Homeless services should be enhanced by psychological expertise along with more person-centred emphatic approaches; the authors of social policies should consider their philosophical assumptions.
Social implications
Systemised mental healthcare does not solve complex problems; fails to meet needs.
Originality/value
The analysis informs the design of further research, prompts practitioners to review their understandings and provides grounds for the rewriting of policies.
Details
Keywords
When detaining and enforcing treatment, psychiatric services often assumed that the person is separate from their dysfunctional biology and removed from their social context…
Abstract
Purpose
When detaining and enforcing treatment, psychiatric services often assumed that the person is separate from their dysfunctional biology and removed from their social context. Coproduction is hindered by polarised views where one party holds power and others are not able to promote their views. But if biomedical models are abandoned, ethical grounding for mental health law would be lost. The purpose of this paper is to explore the experience of detaining and being detained, clarifying understandings of trust, illness, personhood and control.
Design/methodology/approach
A hermeneutic phenomenological approach was employed.
Findings
A Social Worker and man who suffers from psychosis report that their choices are limited by mental health law. They both experience themselves as passive. The man rejects society and withdraws to avoid stress; while the Social Worker just follows legal guidelines. Interaction in mental healthcare is experienced as lacking trust, involving threat, but sometimes negotiation is possible. Control over illness is associated with having a choice of treatments. Psychosis is not experienced as a separate illness process and control is exercised over the person rather than that illness.
Research limitations/implications
This was a small qualitative study designed to prompt discussion and inform further research and policy review.
Practical implications
To enable coproduction, detention or enforced treatment should be grounded more firmly in morality or criminal justice.
Social implications
People who suffer psychosis could be understood and their views more often accepted.
Originality/value
An innovative research approach is used to bring new understanding.