This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Pilgrim, D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Pilgrim, D. Pubmed/NCBI databases Medline Plus Health Information Mental Health Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

`Recovery' and current mental health policy

School of Social Work, University of Central Lancashire, Preston PR1 2HE UK, dpilgrim{at}uclan.ac.uk

This article examines a central plank of current mental health policy — `recovery'. The latter is being used increasingly as a harbinger of progress, when discussing improvements in service quality and social inclusion. Mainly using Britain as a case study, different usages of the term are considered on the part of three main interest groups: traditional biomedical psychiatrists; social psychiatrists emphasizing social skills training; and dissenting service users. These different usages suggest that `recovery' is a polyvalent concept, which creates an uneasy consensus point to define the management philosophies of local services enacting mental health policy. It has also emerged during a time when government health policy is seeking to support people with chronic conditions in community settings on the one hand and minimize the risks they might pose on the other. This tension is particularly relevant for those with mental health problems.

Key Words: Recovery • Mental Health • Psychiatric Rehabilitation

Chronic Illness, Vol. 4, No. 4, 295-304 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/1742395308097863


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?