TY - CONF
T1 - APPLICABILITY OF THE RECOVERY MODEL TO CHILD AND ADOLESCENT MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES
T2 - ARE WE DOSING KIDS WITH AN ADULT FORMULA?
AU - Chen, Wai
PY - 2016
Y1 - 2016
N2 - Background: The ‘National Framework for Recovery-oriented Mental Health Services’ describes Recovery as a key policy direction shaping mental health service delivery across Australia. In the Australian Mental Health Bill 2013, the provision of Recovery-oriented services is embedded within the Core Care Principles in the Charter of Mental Health; inevitably, Recovery forms a cornerstone in modernizing an innovative Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS). Despite extensive mapping of such journeys among adults, mainly focused on the chronic schizophrenia model, the applicability of Recovery to CAMHS has neither been rigorously evaluated nor supported by empirical evidence. Objectives: To highlight the applicability of anomalies and knowledge gaps. Methods: Critical literature review and expert consultation. Findings: On the lexicon level, the term Recovery is not applicable. From the developmental perspective, a mental illness may dislocate young people (YP) from a normative life trajectory, and intervention aims to return the YP to that trajectory and not to the premorbid state. Resilience theory and valorization theory were reported as more relevant as they denote positive adaptation within the context of significant adversity. Simmonds et al. (2014) reported some convergence with adult models in the initial Recovery stages, but there was subsequent divergence. The recent literature on normative and pathological identity formation provides additional insights into specific processes that are unique and critical during adolescence, with relevance to Bourdieu’s notions of ‘social, cultural, economic and symbolic capitals’ in identity shifts. The emphasis in adult models on taking full ‘personal responsibility’ is not appropriate to YP, when parental control and adults’ guidance remain necessary. The notions of ‘hopes’ and ‘connectedness’ must be considered within the context of cognitive maturity and attachment patterns as well as developmental age, which alter the expression of attachment needs and the conceptualization of future and opportunities. Conclusions: The available published studies and expert opinions suggest substantial divergence from adult models: Recovery in YP differs in kind rather than just degree. The findings suggest that policy makers should invest in appropriate research and appraise the available knowledge based on YP’s development.
AB - Background: The ‘National Framework for Recovery-oriented Mental Health Services’ describes Recovery as a key policy direction shaping mental health service delivery across Australia. In the Australian Mental Health Bill 2013, the provision of Recovery-oriented services is embedded within the Core Care Principles in the Charter of Mental Health; inevitably, Recovery forms a cornerstone in modernizing an innovative Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS). Despite extensive mapping of such journeys among adults, mainly focused on the chronic schizophrenia model, the applicability of Recovery to CAMHS has neither been rigorously evaluated nor supported by empirical evidence. Objectives: To highlight the applicability of anomalies and knowledge gaps. Methods: Critical literature review and expert consultation. Findings: On the lexicon level, the term Recovery is not applicable. From the developmental perspective, a mental illness may dislocate young people (YP) from a normative life trajectory, and intervention aims to return the YP to that trajectory and not to the premorbid state. Resilience theory and valorization theory were reported as more relevant as they denote positive adaptation within the context of significant adversity. Simmonds et al. (2014) reported some convergence with adult models in the initial Recovery stages, but there was subsequent divergence. The recent literature on normative and pathological identity formation provides additional insights into specific processes that are unique and critical during adolescence, with relevance to Bourdieu’s notions of ‘social, cultural, economic and symbolic capitals’ in identity shifts. The emphasis in adult models on taking full ‘personal responsibility’ is not appropriate to YP, when parental control and adults’ guidance remain necessary. The notions of ‘hopes’ and ‘connectedness’ must be considered within the context of cognitive maturity and attachment patterns as well as developmental age, which alter the expression of attachment needs and the conceptualization of future and opportunities. Conclusions: The available published studies and expert opinions suggest substantial divergence from adult models: Recovery in YP differs in kind rather than just degree. The findings suggest that policy makers should invest in appropriate research and appraise the available knowledge based on YP’s development.
M3 - Abstract
SP - 7
EP - 8
ER -
