NURSING7203 Essay: Introducing Professional Nursing. (70 Characters)

Differences between Personal and Clinical recovery

In mental health, recovery is either clinical, personal or both whereby we can say that someone has achieved full recovery. The conventional health services, as well as mandatory medications and treatments that work towards clinical recovery, do not promote personal recovery. The essay will utilize the clinical experiences of Mary O’Hagan to help us understand the distinguishing concepts of the two types of mental recovery.

Clinical recovery is when a person no longer exhibits the symptoms to a mental illness. Once a mental patient regains their social functioning and is “back to normal”, the expertise of health professionals regard this as recovery. On the other hand, from the expertise of people who have suffered from a mental condition, personal recovery encompass living a life that is enjoyable and fulfilling. According to Anthony (1993), personal recovery is “…a deeply personal, unique process of changing one’s attitudes, values, feelings, goals, skills, and/or roles. It is a way of living a satisfying, hopeful and contributing life even within the limitations caused by illness. Recovery involves the development of new meaning and purpose in one’s life as one grows beyond the catastrophic effects of mental illness.” From her clinical experiences, Mary O’Hagan discovered that the mental health system did more damage to its mentally ill patients instead of restoring their health and wellness.

Most mental health institutions are focused on achieving clinical recovery yet, recovery from a mental condition goes beyond the recovery from the illness itself. In her book, Madness Made Me, Mary O’Hagan critiques and challenges the traditional mental services that “squeeze the resourcefulness out of mad people, their families, and communities” (O’Hagan, 2014). Most serious mental illnesses have no recovery strategies put in place and are instead organized in a manner that the patients are kept out of acute crisis so that they can become a lesser burden to society. Such mental health services do not contemplate the possibility of the recovery of people who have been in the system for a while (Hamilton, 2015). Mary takes us through her mental crisis and she stay in the ward, describing her fellow patients as “scrapped human beings”. Reality dawns on her of the wasted human lives and the lost potential because of the poor psychiatric services that arouse positive anger in her and propels her into writing the book Madness Made Me (O'Hagan, 2015). 

In her closing alternative vision, O’Hagan felt overwhelmed and destroyed by her personal crisis but her peer supporter encouraged her to think about a single step that she could make forward in each and every day. She recommends new ways of perceiving and valuing distress and madness so that the entire system can support the recovery process of people going through a similar crisis. For instance, peer support is one strategy that supplements the traditional mental health services that fail to promote personal recovery (Carr, 2015). To achieve full recovery, clinical recovery needs to be integrated with personal recovery and the mental health services need to recognize and embrace the ability of patients recovering fully. They should help people work towards it instead of conceiving lifelong mental disability, which is a destructive self-fulfilling prophecy for the patients (O’Hagan, 2014).

The medical understanding of the word ‘recovery’ depicts elimination of symptoms or curing of a mental illness. This is in contrast with personal recovery which describes recovery as a process of overcoming mental illness and distress as well as reclaiming one’s life. Existing literature on recovery challenges the conventional perception that recovery is exclusively all about restoring a person to their previous health status. Additionally, while mental health practitioners can determine clinical recovery by assessing whether the symptoms causing the illness have subsided, the individual determines personal recovery. It is determined by one’s personal version of attaining full life satisfaction and getting a purposeful meaning out of life. In Madness Made Me, the revelation of two completely different accounts of a single person’s state of madness by the doctor and the patient reveals the frightening disconnect involved in the clinical recovery system and services. Mary O’Hagan refused to let go of the meaning of her experiences during her mental illness as she struggled with the effects of the crisis. She used whatever opportunity came her way to be an effective and strong voice to change in the mental health services all over the world.

In addition, the mental health professionals are in charge of a person’s clinical recovery. Conversely, the affected individual makes a personal choice to strive towards attaining personal recovery. Only that person can decide what they want in life and the best way of reaching their full potential. Personal recovery is a process where a person chooses to use their abilities to make modifications to the obstacles preventing them from living a worthwhile life. Therefore, the mental health personnel and services cannot practice personal recovery. Mary O’Hagan confirms her status as a responsible person and not a patient when she says that it is very wrong to put all the blame on mental health personnel for stripping a mad person’s credibility and dreams. She takes responsibility for the fact that the individual themselves, friends and families strip this identity and status from mental patients.

Recovery Principles

Recovery principles are guidelines that help a person suffering from a mental illness to find their path to living a significant life. They put one in control of their life and help them gain respect for themselves as well as self-confidence. In the stories of Janet, the clinical recovery orientation applied on her did not respond to her personal needs and they took away her freedom and dreams from her (Carr, 2015). However, the various recoveries based services that uphold the principles of full recovery, as discussed below, saw her through her mental crisis, unlike the clinical mental services that did her more harm than good.

Difference between Recovery principles and Clinical Recovery based on the Story of Janet

To begin with, the first principle is patient-centered whereby the consumers determine their recovery path depending on their strengths, experiences, needs, cultural backgrounds, and preferences. In clinical recovery, the mental health professionals independently determine the treatment plan to administer to the patients regardless of the adverse effects it may have on the wellness of the patient. In Janet’s story, she was put in a community treatment program with mandatory three weekly injections that exclusively focused on clinical recovery. Although the drugs really slowed her down, her psychiatrist refused to reduce her dosage even after she told him how horrible they made her feel. Further, empowerment is another principle whereby consumers can participate in making decisions that affect them. In most cases, the mental health personnel makes decisions affecting the patient without consulting with the individual and family members, yet, the individuals are the only people who can turn these decisions into actions. Janet decided to enroll for some art sessions and a creative writing focused group that helped her feel completely again. When she went through the benefits and downsides of her medication with a different psychiatrist, they decided that she should stay on a minimal dosage of antipsychotics and this gave a balance to her life (Schrank, Brownell, Tylee & Slade, 2014).

In addition, recovery should be holistic in nature in that it focuses on a person’s entire life, their body, mind, spirit, family, friends, and community. This is in contrast with a clinical recovery that solely focuses on eliminating the symptoms and curing a patient of a mental illness. Her peer supporter accompanied Janet, Lisa to tell her flatmates what had been going on and they accepted her back to the community. Her mother also attended a family recovery group for more than two years. Further, recovery is not a linear step-by-step process but is instead based on continuous growth characterized by occasional success, setbacks and learning from personal experiences (Drake & Whitley, 2014). Janet experienced vicissitudes in her recovery whereby she could wake up in the middle of the night feeling very paranoid and even suicidal. Sometimes the voices in her head really got to her and such days were horrible (Frame, 2013).

Moreover, recovery principles are based on individual strength and one’s ability to bounce back from setbacks. They require a person to value him or herself and build on their strengths instead of fully depending on the clinical recovery processes. Although Janet still hears voices, she has learned to cope by putting them in their place so that they do not interfere with her life. In addition, mutual support from other people promotes recovery. One should join peer groups that help a person find purpose in life (Bird, Leamy, Tew& Slade, 2014). Janet talked to her peer supporter and other clinical workers and she felt relieved sharing with people who understood her. She moved into a peer-run crisis home where she felt welcome and safe (Frame, 2013).

Furthermore, recovery principles dictate that one gets to respect themselves, a concept that is remotely upheld in clinical recovery. The individual believes that they can meet their goals and they take pride in their accomplishments. Such recovery indicates that one is responsible and they have the courage to pursue their goals. Unlike clinical recovery, it gives you hope that you can overcome your crisis. Janet took a local photography course and she began to believe that she could fully recover and have a good and normal life. She learned how to maintain her health, and not be ashamed of herself and to rebuild her life. In addition, Janet got the confidence to go out for parties and look for a job in summer (Park, Rouleau & Valente, 2014).

In conclusion, clinical and personal recovery are different in that the former aims at curing and eliminating symptoms of mental problems while the latter aims at overcoming the illness and living to one’s full potential. A redefinition of the concept of the recovery concept integrates both clinical and personal recovery and defines recovery as having a good life with or without a mental illness. It outlines the significance of hope, personal as well as social responsibility in attaining desirable health outcomes and wellness of the individual. Families, communities, and the people with mental illnesses need to be actively engaged in recovery to supplement the efforts of the mental health services.

Bird, V., Leamy, M., Tew, J., & Slade, M. (2014). Fit for purpose? Validation of a conceptual framework for personal recovery with current mental health consumers. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 0004867413520046.

Carr, S. (2015). Madness made me: a memoir.

Drake, R. E., & Whitley, R. (2014). Recovery and severe mental illness: description and analysis. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 59(5), 236-242.

Frame, J. (2013). The Lagoon and Other Stories. 1951. London: Bloomsbury.

Hamilton, B. E. (2015). Madness made me: A memoir, by Mary O’Hagan.

O’Hagan, M. (2014). Guest Editorial: Recovery in New Zealand: Lessons for Australia? Australian e-journal for the Advancement of Mental Health, 3(1), 5-7.

O'Hagan, M. (2015). Madness made me. Potton & Burton.

Park, M. M., Rouleau, S., & Valente, T. W. (2014). Transforming mental health services: a participatory mixed methods study to promote and evaluate the implementation of recovery-oriented services. Implementation science, 9(1), 119.

Schrank, B., Brownell, T., Tylee, A., & Slade, M. (2014). Positive psychology: An approach to supporting recovery in mental illness. East Asian Archives of Psychiatry, 24(3), 95.

Shepherd, G., Boardman, J., Rinaldi, M., & Roberts, G. (2014). Supporting recovery in mental health services: Quality and outcomes. Centre for Mental Health and Mental Health Network, NHS Confederation, 34.

Slade, M., Amering, M., Farkas, M., & Whitley, R. (2014). Uses and abuses of recovery: implementing recovery?oriented practices in mental health systems. World Psychiatry, 13(1), 12-20.

Thoits, P. A. (2013). Self, identity, stress, and mental health. In Handbook of the sociology of mental health (pp. 357-377). Springer Netherlands.