Opportunities and challenges of self-binding directives: A comparison of empirical research with stakeholders in three European countries.

BACKGROUND: Self-binding directives (SBDs) are psychiatric advance directives that include a clause in which mental health service users consent in advance to involuntary hospital admission and treatment under specified conditions. Medical ethicists and legal scholars identified various potential benefits of SBDs but have also raised ethical concerns. Until recently, little was known about the views of stakeholders on the opportunities and challenges of SBDs. AIMS: This article aims to foster an international exchange on SBDs by comparing recent empirical findings on stakeholders' views on the opportunities and challenges of SBDs from Germany, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. METHOD: Comparisons between the empirical findings were drawn using a structured expert consensus process. RESULTS: Findings converged on many points. Perceived opportunities of SBDs include promotion of autonomy, avoidance of personally defined harms, early intervention, reduction of admission duration, improvement of the therapeutic relationship, involvement of persons of trust, avoidance of involuntary hospital admission, addressing trauma, destigmatization of involuntary treatment, increase of professionals' confidence, and relief for proxy decision-makers. Perceived challenges include lack of awareness and knowledge, lack of support, undue influence, inaccessibility during crisis, lack of cross-agency coordination, problems of interpretation, difficulties in capacity assessment, restricted therapeutic flexibility, scarce resources, disappointment due to noncompliance, and outdated content. Stakeholders tended to focus on practical challenges and did not often raise fundamental ethical concerns. CONCLUSIONS: Stakeholders tend to see the implementation of SBDs as ethically desirable, provided that the associated challenges are addressed.

Situational vulnerability within mental healthcare - a qualitative analysis of ethical challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Mental healthcare users and patients were described as a particularly vulnerable group in the debate on the burdens of the COVID-19 pandemic. Just what this means and what normative conclusions can be derived from it depend to a large extent on the underlying concept of vulnerability. While a traditional understanding locates vulnerability in the characteristics of social groups, a situational and dynamic approach considers how social structures produce vulnerable social positions. The situation of users and patients in different psychosocial settings during the COVID-19 pandemic has not yet been comprehensively considered and ethically analyzed under the aspect of situational vulnerability. METHODS: We present the results of a retrospective qualitative analysis of a survey of ethical challenges in different mental healthcare facilities of a large regional mental healthcare provider in Germany. We evaluate them ethically using a dynamic and situational understanding of vulnerability. RESULTS: Difficulties in implementing infection prevention measures, restrictions of mental health services in favor of infection prevention, social isolation, negative health effects on mental healthcare users and patients, and challenges in implementing regulations on state and provider levels within the local specificities emerged across different mental healthcare settings as ethically salient topics. CONCLUSIONS: Applying a situational and dynamic understanding of vulnerability allows the identification of specific factors and conditions that have contributed to an increased context-dependent vulnerability for mental healthcare users and patients. These factors and conditions should be considered on the level of state and local regulations to reduce and address vulnerability.

Evolvement of Peer Support Workers' Roles in Psychiatric Hospitals: A Longitudinal Qualitative Observation Study.

Peer support workers (PSWs) use their experiential knowledge and specific skills to support patients in their recovery process. The aim of our study was to examine the integration and role-finding process of PSWs in adult psychiatric hospitals in Germany. We conducted open nonparticipant observations of 25 multiprofessional team meetings and 5 transregional peer support worker meetings over a period of six months. The data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Regarding the integration of PSWs into multiprofessional teams, we identified three subcategories: "Features of success," "challenges" and "positioning between team and patients." Concerning the PSWs' roles, we developed two subcategories: "Offers" and "self-perception." The PSWs' specific roles within a multiprofessional mental healthcare team evolve in a process over a longer period of time. This role-finding process should be supported by a framework role description which leaves sufficient freedom for individual development. Regular opportunities for mutual exchange among PSWs can help to address specific support needs at different points in time.

Challenges faced by peer support workers during the integration into hospital-based mental health-care teams: Results from a qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: Being aware of the challenges that may occur during the implementation of peer support work in psychiatry is important to facilitate the integration of peer support workers (PSWs) into multidisciplinary mental health-care teams. AIM: The purpose of this study is to explore the challenges faced by PSWs during their integration into hospital-based mental health-care teams. METHODS: Qualitative content analysis of nine open-ended, semi-structured interviews with PSWs is undertaken in five adult psychiatric hospitals in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany. RESULTS: The analysis of the data revealed three themes: (1) 'Pioneers and the pressure to succeed'; (2) 'a colleague, a rival or yet another patient?' and (3) 'sharing of information, boundaries and professionalism'. All three themes relate to several concrete challenges on different systemic levels and have the potential to impede the PSWs' integration process. CONCLUSION: Specific implementation strategies which address potential barriers on the different systemic levels should be developed and applied prior to the start of the integration of PSWs into multidisciplinary mental health-care teams.

Beneficial effects of peer support in psychiatric hospitals. A critical reflection on the results of a qualitative interview and focus group study.

Background: The implementation of peer support work in psychiatric hospitals is a relatively recent development. Consequently, the effects of peer support work on mental health professionals, patients and peer support workers (PSWs) are mostly unknown.Aims: To explore the beneficial effects of peer support work in detail and to reflect critically on potential sources of misunderstanding.Method: (1) Nine open-ended, semi-structured interviews with PSWs and (2) five focus groups with mental health professionals plus one focus group with PSWs. The data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis.Results: Our data show various beneficial effects on patients, such as the themes "less professional distance," "more time for one-on-one attendance" and "a role model for recovery." Themes that emerged for mental health professionals were, amongst others, "adding a new perspective," "improved continuity in treatment offers" and "preserving a respectful tone in meetings."Conclusions: It is necessary to minimize the risk of role confusion to achieve the beneficial potential of peer support work. A thorough education on what peer support work can and cannot deliver is essential and could help to foster its successful implementation.