Good & Evil in the Crusade of Care: Social Constructions of Mental Disorders

Evidence-Based Practice in Forensic Mental Health Nursing: A Critical Review

METHOD

Literature searches of databases, particularly CINAHL, using key phrases were undertaken.

RESULTS

Some authors argue that there is a lack of evidence in forensic mental health (FMH) nursing, with few randomized controlled trials and other methods providing definitive, generalizable evidence. However, literature searches revealed randomized controlled trials of relevance to FMH nursing, many qualitative studies by FMH nurses, and arguments for clinical experience and knowledge of service users, and the latter's views, as sources of evidence.

DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

Research findings can be applied to practice, both directly and indirectly. Examples are given of ways that evidence can be used to inform FMH nursing interventions related to therapeutic ward environments, including communication, therapeutic relationships, preventing retraumatization, and enabling physical health. The complex nature of "evidence" is considered in relation to risk assessment and management.

CONCLUSIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

FMH nursing can be based on a wide range of sources of evidence. The types of evidence used in practice depend on individual service users' needs and views. In evaluating evidence, it is necessary to be aware of its complex, diverse nature. A distinction can be made between definitive, widely generalizable research findings and evidence with limited generalizability, requiring FMH nurses' judgments about whether it is applicable to their own area of practice. Recommendations for related education and research are made.

Perceptions of diagnostic labels in forensic psychiatric practice: a survey of differences between nurses and other disciplines

This paper reports on a study of nurses' and non-nurses' perceptions of labels of mental illness and personality disorder in forensic services in the UK. The objectives of the study were to establish if differences in perceptions existed within, and between, the two groups of professionals. The research method was a survey design with 1,200 questionnaires distributed to nurses and 300 to other professionals in disciplines on forensic units in the UK, with response rates of 34.6% and 43%, respectively. The target population included clinical health care staff who had patient contact, including nurses, psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers, and occupational therapists. The results indicate that there are statistically significant differences within both nursing and non-nursing groups and also between the groups in relation to a "management" perspective for individuals labelled with a personality disorder and a "clinical" focus for individuals who are labelled as mentally ill. This paper adds research into the arena of forensic mental health in relation to the diagnostic labels of mental illness and personality disorders. It also adds evidence of a clinical response or a management response to such diagnostic labels which may impact on the practice of forensic psychiatry.

Personality disorders: illegitimate subject positions

The diagnosis of personality disorder is common in mental health nurse settings and is a term often used without critical consideration. In clinical practice, the term personality disorder has pejorative connotations, which arise out of the way in which these behaviours are constructed as behavioural rather than psychiatric. The discursive construction of categories of personality disorder are inculcated into clinical practice and become taken-for-granted by those in practice culture. The construction of some personalities as disordered and, therefore, illegitimate becomes natural. This paper provides a critical analysis of the diagnosis and suggests an approach to mental health nursing care that is more legitimizing for those people who receive psychiatric diagnoses.

Prisoners signify: a political discourse analysis of mental illness in a prison control unit

Increasingly, US prisoners diagnosed with mental illness are housed in control units, the most restrictive form of confinement in the US prison system. This situation has led to intense debate over the legal, ethical and clinical status of mental illness. This is a semiotic struggle with profound effects, yet most related work treats mental illness as a neutral, individual variable. Few analyses locate mental illness within a larger sociopolitical context. Fewer still focus on discursive practice. None critically analyze the accounts of control unit prisoners, who talk about extreme marginality and risk for victimization. This paper has two aims: (i) to develop a systematic method of analysis that accounts for signification as discourse-in-action; and (ii) to show how prisoners' signification of mental illness articulates agency through and against marginalizing discourse. Political discourse analysis demonstrates how control unit prisoners with psychiatric diagnoses signify mental illness, and articulate safer identifications in the process.

Relational Ethics in Forensic Psychiatric Settings

1. The pressure of the competing demands of custody and caring shapes the moral climate of forensic settings. 2. A relational approach to health care ethics, requiring the opening of dialogue, consideration of multiple perspectives, and attention to context, can guide nurses as they strive to engage and respect even their most estranged patients. 3. The core elements of relational ethics include mutual respect, engagement, and attention to the environment.