A qualitative study on the ethics of transforming care: examining the development and implementation of Canada’s first mental health strategy

Implementation Science

Laurence JKirmayer¹  Hiba Zafran³  Cheryl Mattingly¹  Raphael Lencucha³  Melissa MPark² 

[1] Division of Social and Transcultural Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry, McGill University, 1033 Pine Ave, Montreal H3A 1A1, QC, Canada;Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal H3T 1E2, QC, Canada;School of Physical and Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Medicine, McGill University, 3600 Promenade Sir William Osler, Montreal H3G 1Y5, QC, Canada

关键词: Participatory research;    Ethnography;    Everyday ethics;    Practice guidelines;    Policy;    Recovery;   

Others  :  1228873
DOI  :  10.1186/s13012-015-0297-y

 received in 2015-07-01, accepted in 2015-07-22,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

The Mental Health Commission of Canada worked collaboratively with stakeholders to create a new framework for a federal mental health strategy, which is now mandated for implementation by 2017. The proposed strategies have been written into provincial health plans, hospital accreditation standards, and the annual objectives of psychiatric departments and community organizations. This project will explore the decision-making process among those who contributed to Canada’s first federal mental health policy and those implementing this policy in the clinical setting. Despite the centrality of ethical reasoning to the successful uptake of the recent national guidelines for recovery-oriented care, to date, there are no studies focused exclusively on the ethical tensions that emerged and continue to emerge during the creation and implementation of the new standards for recovery-oriented practice.

Methods/design

This two-year Canadian Institute of Health Research Catalyst Grant in Ethics (2015–2017) consists of three components. C-I, a retrospective, qualitative study consisting of document analysis and interviews with key policy-makers of the ethical tensions that arose during the development of Canada’s Mental Health Strategy will be conducted in parallel to C-II, a theory-based, focused ethnography of how mental health practitioners in a psychiatric setting reason about and act upon new standards in everyday practice. Case-based scenarios of ethical tensions will be developed from C-I/II and fed-forward to C-III: participatory forums with policy-makers, mental health practitioners, and other stakeholders in recovery-oriented services to collectively identify and prioritize key ethical concerns and generate action steps to close the gap between the policy-making process and its implementation at the local level.

Discussion

Policy-makers and clinicians make important everyday decisions that effect the creation and implementation of new practice standards. Particularly, there is a need to understand how ethical dilemmas that arise during this decision-making process and the reasoning and resources they use to resolve these tensions impact on the implementation process. This catalyst grant in ethics will (1) introduce a novel line of inquiry focusing on the ethical tensions that arose in the development of Canada’s first mental health strategy, while (2) intensifying our focus on the ethical aspects of moving policy into action.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Park et al.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Changing directions, changing lives: the mental health strategy for Canada. 2012.
• [2]Toward recovery and well-being. A framework for a mental health strategy for Canada. 2009.
• [3]Rogers EM. Diffusion of innovations. Free Press, New York; 1995.
• [4]Slade M. 100 ways to support recovery: a guide for mental health professionals. Rethink, London; 2009.
• [5]Kirmayer LJ. Les politiques de l’altérité dans la rencontre clinique [The politics of alterity in the clinical encounter]. L’Autre: Cliniques, Cultures et Sociétés. 2011; 12(1):16-29.
• [6]Adeponle AB, Whitley R, Kirmayer LJ. Cultural contexts and constructions of recovery. In: Recovery of people with mental illness: philosophical and related perspectives. Rudnick A, editor. Oxford University Press, New York; 2012: p.109-32.
• [7]Austin W, Goble E, Kelecevic J. The ethics of forensic psychiatry: moving beyond principles to a relational ethics approach. J Forensic Psychiatry Psychol. 2009; 20(6):835-50.
• [8]Kirmayer LJ. Empathy and alterity in cultural psychiatry. Ethos. 2008; 36(4):457-74.
• [9]Accreditation Canada Strategic Plan 2010-2013. Accreditation Canada~Agrément Canada, Ottawa; 2010.
• [10]Park MM, Zafran H, Stewart J, Salsberg J, Ells C, Rouleau S et al.. Transforming mental health services: a participatory mixed methods study to promote and evaluate the implementation of recovery-oriented services. Implement Sci. 2014; 9:119. BioMed Central Full Text
• [11]Kinsella EA, Park AJ-S, Appiagyei J, Chang E, Chow D. Through the eyes of students: ethical tensions in occupational therapy practice. Can J Occup Ther. 2008; 75(3):176-83.
• [12]Grant VJ, Briscoe J. Clinical ethics. Everyday ethics in an acute psychiatry unit. J Med Ethics. 2002; 28:173-6.
• [13]Massumi B. Interview with Brian Massumi by Mary Zournazi. In: Assembly international: a debate on micro-politics, self-organization and international affairs. http://www.assembly-international.net/Interviews/html/brian%20massumi.html Accessed January 1 2012.
• [14]Zigon J. Within a range of possibilities: morality and ethics in social life. Ethnos. 2009; 74(2):251-76.
• [15]Mattingly C. In search of the good: narrative reasoning in clinical practice. Med Anthropol Q. 1998; 12(3):273-97.
• [16]Brodwin P. Everyday ethics: voices from the front line of community psychiatry. University of California Press, Los Angeles; 2013.
• [17]Pelligrino ED, Thomasma DC. The conflict between autonomy and beneficence in medical ethics: Proposal for a resolution. J Contemp Health Law Policy. 1987; 3(23):23-46.
• [18]Sumsion T, Lencucha R. Balancing challenges and facilitating factors when implementing client-centered collaboration in a mental health setting. Br J Occup Ther. 2007; 70(12):513-20.
• [19]Marshall SL, Crowe TP, Oades LG, Deane FF, Kavanagh DJ. A review of consumer involvement in evaluations of case management: consistency with a recovery paradigm. Psychiatr Serv. 2007; 58:396-401.
• [20]Schwartz R, Estein O, Komaroff J, Lamb J, Myers M, Stewart J et al.. Mental health consumers and providers dialogue in an institutional setting: a participatory approach to promoting recovery-oriented care. Psychiatr Rehabil J. 2013; 36(2):113-5.
• [21]Hunt LM, Mattingly C. Diverse rationalities and multiple realities in illness and healing. Med Anthropol Q. 1998; 12(3):267-72.
• [22]Mattingly C. Healing dramas and clinical plots: the narrative structure of experience. Cambridge University, New York; 1998.
• [23]Lencucha R, Kothari A, Hamel N. Extending collaborations for knowledge translation: lessons from the community-based participatory research literature. Evidence & Policy. 2010; 6(1):61-75.
• [24]Mattingly C, Fleming MH. Clinical reasoning: forms of inquiry in a therapeutic practice. F.A. Davis, Philadelphia; 1994.
• [25]Nussbaum MC. Nature, function, and capability: Artistotle on political distribution. World Institute for Development of Economics Research of the United Nations University, Helsinki; 1987.
• [26]McCarthy J. Principlism or narrative ethics: must we choose between them? Med Humanit. 2003; 29(2):65-71.
• [27]Stories matter: the role of narrative in medical ethics. Routledge, New York; 2002.
• [28]Mattingly C. Moral selves and moral scenes: narrative experiments in everyday life. Ethnos. 2012; 78(3):301-27.
• [29]Mattingly C. Moral laboratories: family peril and the struggle for a good life. University of California Press, Oakland; 2014.
• [30]Kirmayer LJ. Broken narratives. In: Narrative and the cultural construction of illness and healing. Mattingly C, Garro LC, editors. University of California Press, Los Angeles; 2000: p.153-80.
• [31]Mattingly C. The paradox of hope: journeys through a clinical borderland. University of California Press, Los Angeles; 2010.
• [32]Kleinman A. What really matters: living a moral life amidst uncertainty and danger. Oxford University Press, Oxford; 2006.
• [33]Lawlor MC, Mattingly C. Boundary crossing: an ethnographic and longitudinal study. University of Southern California, Los Angeles; 2000.
• [34]Lawlor MC, Mattingly C. Boundary crossing: resituating cultural competence. 2005.
• [35]Stoller P. Sensuous scholarship. Contemporary ethnography. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia; 1997.
• [36]Csordas TJ. Body/meaning/healing. Contemporary anthropology of religion. Palgrave Macmillan, New York; 2002.
• [37]Jackson M. Existential anthropology: events, exigencies and effects. Methodology and history in anthropology. Berghahn Books, New York; 2005.
• [38]Foucault M. Madness and civilization: a history of insanity in the age of reason. Random House of Canada, Toronto; 1965.
• [39]Giddens A. The constitution of society: outline of a theory structuration. University of California Press, Los Angeles; 1986.
• [40]Bourdieu P. Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge University Press, New York; 1977.
• [41]Hajer MA. Doing discourse analysis: coalitions, practices, meaning. In: Words matter in policy and planning: Discourse theory and method in the social sciences. Brink M, Metze T, editors. Netherlands Geolgraphical Studies, Utrecht; 2006: p.43-74.
• [42]Mattingly C. Pocahontas goes to the clinic: Disney as Lingua Franca in a Cultural Borderland. American Anthropological Association 101st Annual Meeting, Arlington; 2002.
• [43]Peacock JL, Holland DC. The narrated self: life stories in process. Ethos. 1996; 21(4):19-43.
• [44]Bruner J. A narrative model of self-construction. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1999; 818:145-61.
• [45]Bruner J. Making stories: law, literature, life. 2002.
• [46]Mattingly C, Lawlor MC. Learning from stories: narrative interviewing in cross-cultural research. Scand J Occup Ther. 2000; 7(1):4-14.
• [47]Davidson L. Living outside mental illness: qualitative studies of recovery in schizophrenia. New York University Press, New York; 2003.
• [48]Desjarlais R, Throop CJ. Phenomenological approaches in anthropology. Annu Rev Anthropol. 2011; 40:87-102.
• [49]Bourdieu P, Wacquant LJD. An invitation to reflexive sociology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago; 1992.
• [50]Geertz C. The interpretation of cultures. 1973.
• [51]Madriz E. Focus groups in feminist research. In: Handbook of qualitative research. Denzin N, Lincoln Y, editors. Sage Publications, Beverly Hills; 2000: p.559-603.
• [52]Emerson RM, Fretz RI, Shaw LL. Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. University of Chicago Press, Chicago; 2011.
• [53]Burke K. A grammar of motives. University of California Press, Los Angeles; 1969. [1945]
• [54]Cresswell JW, Miller DL. Determining validity in qualitative research. Theor Pract. 2000; 39(3):124-30.
• [55]Kinsella EA. Knowledge paradigms in occupational science: pluralistic perspectives. Occupational science: society, inclusion, participation. Whiteford GE, Hocking C, editors. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford; 2012.
• [56]Kinsella EA, Whiteford GE. Knowledge generation and utilization in occupational therapy: Towards episteic reflexivity. Aust Occupat Ther J. 2008:1-10. doi:. 10. 1111/j.1440-1630.2007.00726.x webcite
• [57]Carter SM, Little M. Justifying knowledge, justifying method, taking action: epistemologies, methodologies, and methods in qualitative research. Qual Health Res. 2007; 17(10):1316-28.
• [58]Corin E, Bibeau G. Speaking about culture in multiple voices. Transcult Psychiatry. 2006; 43(1):106-25.
• [59]Curry LA, O’Cathain A, Clark VLP, Aroni R, Fetters M, Berg D. The role of group dynamics in mixed methods health sciences research teams. J Mixed Methods Res. 2012; 6(1):5-20.
• [60]Leavy P. Method meets art: art-based research practice. The Guilford Press, New York; 2009.
• [61]Emotions in the field. Stanford University Press, Stanford; 2010.
• [62]Garro LC, Mattingly C. Narrative as construct and construction. In: Narrative and the cultural construction of illness and healing. Mattingly C, Garro LC, editors. University of California Press, Los Angeles; 2000: p.1-48.
• [63]Mertens DM. Emerging advances in mixed methods: addressing social justice. J Mixed Methods Res. 2013; 7(3):215-8.
• [64]Kirmayer LJ. Cultural competence and evidence-based practice in mental health: epistemic communities and the politics of pluralism. Soc Sci Med. 2012; 75:249-56.
• [65]Pelletier J-F, Lesage A, Delorme A, Macaulay AC, Salsberg J, Vallée C et al.. Feature~user-led research: a global and person-centered initiative. Int J Mental Health Promot. 2011; 13(1):4-12.
• [66]Park M. Making scenes: imaginative practices for a child with autism in an occupational therapy session. Med Anthropol Q. 2008; 22(3):234-56.
• [67]Park M. Beyond calculus: apple-apple-apple-ike and other embodied pleasures for a child diagnosed with autism in a sensory integration based clinic. Disabil Stud Quart. 2010;30(1).
• [68]Park M. Pleasure, throwing breaches, and embodied metaphors: tracing transformations-in-participation for a child with autism to a sensory integration-based therapy session. Occup Participat Health. 2012; 32(1 Suppl.):S34-S47.
• [69]Drope J, Lencucha R. Tobacco control and trade policy: proactive strategies for integrating policy norms. J Public Health Policy. 2013; 34(1):153-64.
• [70]Lencucha R. Philip Morris versus Uruguay: health governance challenged. Lancet. 2010; 376(9744):852-3.
• [71]Lencucha R. Cosmopolitanism and foreign policy for health: ethics for and beyond the state. BMC Int Health Hum Rights. 2013; 13(1):29. BioMed Central Full Text
• [72]Lencucha R, Labonté R, Rouse MJ. Beyond idealism and realism: Canadian NGO/government relations during the negotiation of the FCTC. J Public Health Policy. 2010; 31(1):74-87.