Search

Introduction: Associations between structural inequalities and health are well established. However, there is limited work examining this link in relation to mental health, or that centres public perspectives. This study explores people's experience and sense-making of inequality in their daily lives, with particular consideration of impacts on mental health., Methods: We conducted a peer research study. Participants had to live in one of two London Boroughs and have an interest in inequalities and mental health. Using social media, newsletters, local organisations and our peer researchers' contacts, we recruited 30 participants who took photos representing their experience of inequality and discussed them during semi-structured interviews. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis., Results: Three themes were identified in this study: (1) inequalities are unjust, multilayered and intertwined with mental health. Accounts demonstrated a deep understanding of inequalities and their link to mental health outcomes, describing inequalities as 'suffering' and 'not good for anyone'. Financial, housing, immigration and healthcare problems exacerbated poor mental health, with racism, gender-based violence and job loss also contributing factors for both poor mental health and experiences of inequality; (2) inequalities exclude and have far-reaching mental health consequences, impacting personal sense of belonging and perceived societal value and (3) moving forwards-addressing long-standing inequality and poor public mental health necessitated coping and resilience strategies that are often unacknowledged and undervalued by support systems., Conclusion: Lived experience expertise was central in this study, creating an innovative methodological approach. To improve public mental health, we must address the everyday, painful structural inequalities experienced by many as commonplace and unfair. New policies and strategies must be found that involve communities, redistributing resources and power, building on a collective knowledge base, to coproduce actions combatting inequalities and improving population mental health., Patient or Public Contribution: This study was peer-led, designed and carried out by researchers who had experiences of poor mental health. Six authors of the paper worked as peer researchers on this study., (© 2023 The Authors. Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Personal budgets aim to increase choice and independence for people with social care needs but they remain underused by people with mental health problems compared to other disability groups. The use of personal budgets may impact on families in a variety of ways, both positive and negative. This paper draws on interviews, undertaken in 2012-2013 with 18 family carers and 12 mental health service users, that explored experiences of family involvement in accessing and managing personal budgets for a person with mental health-related social care needs. The sample was drawn from three sites across England, with additional carers being recruited via voluntary sector networks. Our findings show that for many people with severe mental health needs who lack motivation and confidence to negotiate access to personal budgets, carers may provide the necessary support to enable them to benefit from this form of social care support. We illustrate the role carers may play in initiating, pursuing and maximising the level of support available through personal budgets. However, some carers interviewed considered that personal budget funding was reduced because of practitioners' assumptions about carers' willingness and ability to provide support. We also report perceived tensions between family carers and practitioners around appropriate involvement in decision-making. The study findings have implications for local authorities, practitioners and family carers in supporting the involvement of family carers in support for people with severe mental health problems., (© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Relatives or carers of people with mental health problems have criticised professionals for their failures to share information with them. This article reports on a multiple method study comprising a policy search, a survey of service users, carers and professionals, and stakeholder interviews and group events. The study found few policies that addressed the principles underpinning information sharing with carers. However, examples of good practice in professional involvement of carers that took account of carer rights and responsibilities emerged from the research. This suggests the relevance of the carer's assessment, a carer's right to an assessment of his or her circumstances and wishes in assisting understanding of the care context and enhancing appropriate information sharing between professionals and carers.

Two forms of compulsory mental healthcare and supervision in the community are provided within the Mental Health Act 1983: Supervised Discharge Orders (SDOs) and guardianship. At a time when the Government are proposing to extend powers of supervision over people with severe mental illness in the community, it is appropriate that service users' experiences of existing legislation are examined and reported. Despite a range of literature that presents mental health service users' views and experiences, it remains unclear how service users respond to compulsory community mental healthcare in England. The present paper presents the findings of a qualitative investigation into service users' perceptions and experiences of living with SDOs. In the interviews, service users communicated their understanding of why mental health professionals placed them on the order and how their lives have been affected. Individual service users are capable of seemingly contradictory responses, simultaneously accepting and resisting the orders. This paper presents a typology of the range of responses. These responses are fatalism and resignation, dependency, ownership, bargaining, cooperation, resistance, and rejection. The study provides a model with which we can begin to understand how service users respond to compulsory community care where their options are legally constrained.