ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Recovery is a widely accepted paradigm in mental health care, whilst the correctional and forensic-psychiatric field is still searching for foundations for its implementation. Knowledge regarding recovery of persons with intellectual disabilities in secure contexts is limited. This study assesses recovery needs and resources among persons with intellectual disabilities labelled not criminally responsible and investigates the impact of the judicial label on recovery processes. METHODS: A sample of 26 individuals was composed purposively, and in-depth interviews were conducted. Recurrent themes were identified using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Traditional recovery themes emerged from the narratives, next to aspects of recovery in a forensic or correctional context. However, the operationalization and proportional impact are specific for this sample. CONCLUSIONS: The social dimension overarches all other recovery dimensions. The integration of an explicit social rhetoric is imperative, including contextual, relational, interactional and societal dimensions. This offers pathways to reverse the traditional, paternalistic model of exclusion and classification.
Subject(s)
Criminals , Health Services Needs and Demand , Intellectual Disability , Mental Competency , Persons with Mental Disabilities , Adult , Criminals/psychology , Forensic Psychiatry , Humans , Intellectual Disability/psychology , Intellectual Disability/rehabilitation , Male , Mental Competency/psychology , Persons with Mental Disabilities/psychology , Persons with Mental Disabilities/rehabilitation , Qualitative ResearchABSTRACT
The recovery paradigm is a widely accepted strength-based approach in general mental health care. Particular challenges arise when applying this paradigm in a forensic context. To address these issues, the present study examined recovery based on first-person narratives of offenders formerly labeled as not criminally responsible of whom the judicial measure was abrogated. Eleven in-depth interviews were conducted to obtain information on lived experiences and recovery resources of this hard-to-reach and understudied population. The interviews focused on recovery and elements that indicated a sense of progress in life. Key themes were derived from the collected data. Descriptions of recovery resources followed recurrent themes, including clinical, functional, social, and personal resources. Participants also reported ambiguous experiences related to features of the judicial trajectory. This was defined as forensic recovery and can be seen as an additional mechanism, besides more established recovery dimensions, that is unique to mentally ill offenders.