↓ Skip to main content

A qualitative study examining the presence and consequences of moral framings in patients’ and mental health workers’ experiences of community treatment orders

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
117 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A qualitative study examining the presence and consequences of moral framings in patients’ and mental health workers’ experiences of community treatment orders
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12888-015-0653-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sharon Lawn, Toni Delany, Mariastella Pulvirenti, Ann Smith, John McMillan

Abstract

Mental health recovery involves acknowledging the importance of building the person's capacity for agency. This might be particularly important for patients on community treatment orders (CTOs - which involve enforced treatment for their mental illness), given limited international evidence for their effectiveness and underlying concerns about the use of coercion by workers and systems of care towards this population of people with mental illness. This study sought to understand how the meaning of CTOs is constructed and experienced, from the perspective of patients on CTOs and workers directly administering CTOs. Qualitative interviews were conducted with South Australian community mental health patients (n = 8) and mental health workers (n = 10) in 2013-14. During thematic analysis of data, assisted by NVIVO software, the researchers were struck by the language used by both groups of participants and so undertook an examination of the moral framings apparent within the data. Moral framing was apparent in participants' constructions and evaluations of the CTO experience as positive, negative or justifiable. Most patient participants appeared to use moral framing to: try to understand why they were placed on a CTO; make sense of the experience of being on a CTO; and convey the lessons they have learnt. Worker participants appeared to use moral framing to justify the imposition of care. Empathy was part of this, as was patients' positive right to services and treatment, which they believed would only occur for these patients via a CTO. Workers positioned themselves as trying to put themselves in the patients' shoes as a way of acting virtuously towards them, softening the coercive stick approach. Four themes were identified: explicit moral framing; best interests of the patient; lessons learned by the patient; and, empathy. Experiences of CTOs are multi-layered, and depend critically upon empathy and reflection on the relationship between what is done and how it is done. This includes explicit examination of the moral framing present in everyday interactions between mental health workers and their patients in order to overcome the paradox of the moral grey zone between caring and controlling. It suggests a need for workers to receive ongoing empathy training.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 117 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 114 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 16%
Student > Bachelor 14 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 11%
Researcher 10 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 9%
Other 16 14%
Unknown 35 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 25 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 14%
Social Sciences 6 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 9 8%
Unknown 42 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 February 2016.
All research outputs
#17,776,579
of 22,832,057 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#3,678
of 4,692 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,243
of 285,670 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#72
of 89 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,832,057 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,692 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.9. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 285,670 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 89 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.