The social determinants of health are important factors that shape a person’s well-being, life expectancy, and quality of life. The environments in which people live, work, and play are paramount in determining their overall health. As such, viewing health as an outcome, not only of individual choices and biomedical factors but also of socioenvironmental influences, can be an important lens to guide health-care practice. This report examined the social determinants of health of people admitted to inpatient units in a forensic psychiatry program in a major Canadian urban centre. Twenty health variables were collected from the Resident Assessment Instrument–Mental Health form. A deprivation scale was created to understand social and material inequality on a gradient. Findings showed that those surveyed had high rates of poor social determinant of health factors, such as low educational attainment, insecure housing, and lack of secure employment before their admission to the program. Chi-square tests showed associations between material deprivation, race, and comorbidity status. The findings may influence a multisectorial approach to mental illness prevention, management, and recovery practices.
Read moreforensic mental health
Vicarious trauma and occupational hazard for forensic mental health professionals
Vicarious trauma or vicarious traumatization is the effects on a health-care worker that results from the empathic engagement or therapeutic relationship with clients or patients and their reports of traumatic experiences. The term was coined in response to the experience of psychotherapists working with trauma survivors and is widely attributed to McCann and Pearlman 1990 [1]. They developed a constructivist self-development theory discussing therapist reactions to clients’ traumatic material. They described that vicarious trauma can be understood as related to the graphic and painful material trauma clients portray to the therapists as well as the therapists unique cognitive schemas or beliefs and assumptions about self and others [1]. This theory has developed, has subsequently been described as compassion fatigue and has been subject to a considerable amount of research since this early description [2-18]. It has also focused on various professionals, including mental health professionals, and their vulnerability from working with a variety of clients or patients [4-6,8-10,12-14,19]. In this context, forensic mental health professionals are not specifically mentioned, although it is quite clear that the nature of the work that they do would make them vulnerable to vicarious trauma and “compassion fatigue.”
Read moreExamining the use of the recovery model with individuals found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder: Revealing tensions between risk management strategies and recovery
In providing the care and control of individuals found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (NCRMD), forensic psychiatry attempts to balance the protection of society with the treatment of mental illness. A new approach in mental health care is the recovery model, which centres on the understanding that there should be a recovery in, not a recovery from serious mental illness. In clinical practice, this means that treatment decisions should be made in collaboration with patients and include their personal circumstances, such as criminality and aspirations. Concepts that intersect with these goals are elements like choice, hope, personal responsibility and empowerment. This paper examines the implementation of the recovery model in forensic mental health settings and provides an in-depth exploration and evaluation of the model as it is practised at a forensic psychiatric outpatient clinic with individuals found NCRMD. Ten participants, including both individuals found NCRMD and psychiatric professionals, took part in semi-structured interviews. Qualitative data analysis of the interview transcripts identified the following six themes: choice, recovery, hope, responsibility, agency, and risk. This paper examines the experiences, perceptions, and challenges of implementing the recovery model in a forensic psychiatric setting and compares its strategies to the predominant risk-based forensic practices. The analysis suggests that it is difficult to implement the recovery model in a forensic setting without compromising either the recovery model or the risk management approach.
Read more