Search

Purpose The concept of user participation is well accepted internationally. Nevertheless, studies show that both patients and health professionals find it challenging to maintain patient-centred ideals in the context of severe mental illness. The purpose of this paper is to explore how professionals deal with the ideals in light of patients’ right to participate in planning and decision making regarding milieu therapeutic measures and activities.Design/methodology/approach This is a qualitative study with an interactionist approach based on fieldwork at three district psychiatric centres in Norway during 2011-2012. The observations focused on patient-staff interaction in milieu therapeutic activities. Interviews were based on observed situations.Findings Adherence to treatment, rules and routines restricted patient autonomy. The professionals’ practical orientation towards routines overrode the ideals of patients’ rights. The staff regarded user participation primarily as participation in organised and mandatory activities. Refusal to comply was met with different sanctions, e.g. the prospect of being discharged.Originality/value Although user participation calls for patient-centred approaches, there is some debate about the challenges and premises for cooperation with persons suffering from severe mental conditions. This study adds insight into the everyday organisational context that facilitates or impedes user participation. It helps to explain why the user perspective can be overlooked, thus providing important information to both clinicians and policy makers who aim to fulfil the patient’s right to participate in planning and decision making regarding treatment and care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An ideal in mental health care is user participation. This implies inclusion and facilitation by clinicians to enable users to participate in decisions about themselves and in the design of suitable treatment. However, much of the work of clinicians consists of handovers and other meetings where patients are not present. It is therefore interesting to study how the patient perspective is handled in such meetings and whether it forms a basis for user participation. We conducted fieldwork in three different inpatient wards in Norwegian District Psychiatric Centres. We used an interactional perspective in our analysis, where speech acts, framing and footing were key concepts. The findings show that the talk in the handovers and meetings contained five main themes and that there was a clear correlation between what was said and how it was said, and whether clinicians related to the content in a decisive, person‐centred or indecisive manner. We discuss potential participation statuses for patients and their limited opportunity to influence the talk and possible decisions about themselves. Our conclusion is that handover meetings primarily function as an aid in organising clinicians' work and could ultimately be seen as counteracting user participation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]