The Introduction of Medication-Free Mental Health Services in Norway: An Analysis of the Framing and Impact of Arguments From Different Standpoints

Introduction: Debates about coercive practices have challenged a traditional biomedical hegemony in mental health care. The perspectives of service user organizations have gained considerable ground, such as in the development of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Such change...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Olav Nyttingnes, Jorun Rugkåsa
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-07-01
Series:Frontiers in Psychiatry
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.685024/full
_version_ 1818656135450722304
author Olav Nyttingnes
Olav Nyttingnes
Jorun Rugkåsa
Jorun Rugkåsa
author_facet Olav Nyttingnes
Olav Nyttingnes
Jorun Rugkåsa
Jorun Rugkåsa
author_sort Olav Nyttingnes
collection DOAJ
description Introduction: Debates about coercive practices have challenged a traditional biomedical hegemony in mental health care. The perspectives of service user organizations have gained considerable ground, such as in the development of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Such changes are often contested, and might in practice be a result of (implicit) negotiation between stakeholders with different discursive positions. To improve understanding of such processes, and how discursive positions may manifest and interact, we analyzed texts published over a 10 year period related to the introduction of medication-free inpatient services in Norway.Methods: We conducted qualitative analyses of 36 policy documents related to the introduction of medication-free services and 75 opinion pieces from a subsequent debate. We examined discursive practices in these texts as expressions of what is perceived as legitimate knowledge upon which to base mental health care from the standpoints of government, user organizations and representatives of the psychiatric profession. We paid particular attention to how standpoints were framed in different discourse surrounding mental health care, and how these interacted and changed during the study period (2008–2018).Results: The analysis shows how elements from the discourse promoted by service user organizations—most notably the legitimacy of personal experiences as a legitimate source of knowledge—entered the mainstream by being incorporated into public policy. Strong reactions to this shift, firmly based in biomedical discourse, endorsed evidence-based medicine as the authoritative source of knowledge to ensure quality care, although accepting patient involvement. Involuntary medication, and how best to help those with non-response to antipsychotic medication represented a point at which discursive positions seemed irreconcilable.Conclusion: The relative authorities of different sources of knowledge remain an area of contention, and especially in determining how best to help patients who do not benefit from antipsychotics. Future non-inferiority trials of medication-free services may go some way to break this discursive deadlock.
first_indexed 2024-12-17T03:20:46Z
format Article
id doaj.art-fb72a7893550433bb5dd89df3a47aee6
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1664-0640
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-17T03:20:46Z
publishDate 2021-07-01
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format Article
series Frontiers in Psychiatry
spelling doaj.art-fb72a7893550433bb5dd89df3a47aee62022-12-21T22:05:32ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Psychiatry1664-06402021-07-011210.3389/fpsyt.2021.685024685024The Introduction of Medication-Free Mental Health Services in Norway: An Analysis of the Framing and Impact of Arguments From Different StandpointsOlav Nyttingnes0Olav Nyttingnes1Jorun Rugkåsa2Jorun Rugkåsa3Health Services Research Unit, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, NorwayR&D Department Mental Health, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, NorwayHealth Services Research Unit, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, NorwayCentre for Care Research, University of South-Eastern Norway, Porsgrunn, NorwayIntroduction: Debates about coercive practices have challenged a traditional biomedical hegemony in mental health care. The perspectives of service user organizations have gained considerable ground, such as in the development of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Such changes are often contested, and might in practice be a result of (implicit) negotiation between stakeholders with different discursive positions. To improve understanding of such processes, and how discursive positions may manifest and interact, we analyzed texts published over a 10 year period related to the introduction of medication-free inpatient services in Norway.Methods: We conducted qualitative analyses of 36 policy documents related to the introduction of medication-free services and 75 opinion pieces from a subsequent debate. We examined discursive practices in these texts as expressions of what is perceived as legitimate knowledge upon which to base mental health care from the standpoints of government, user organizations and representatives of the psychiatric profession. We paid particular attention to how standpoints were framed in different discourse surrounding mental health care, and how these interacted and changed during the study period (2008–2018).Results: The analysis shows how elements from the discourse promoted by service user organizations—most notably the legitimacy of personal experiences as a legitimate source of knowledge—entered the mainstream by being incorporated into public policy. Strong reactions to this shift, firmly based in biomedical discourse, endorsed evidence-based medicine as the authoritative source of knowledge to ensure quality care, although accepting patient involvement. Involuntary medication, and how best to help those with non-response to antipsychotic medication represented a point at which discursive positions seemed irreconcilable.Conclusion: The relative authorities of different sources of knowledge remain an area of contention, and especially in determining how best to help patients who do not benefit from antipsychotics. Future non-inferiority trials of medication-free services may go some way to break this discursive deadlock.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.685024/fullmedication-free treatmentcoercionmental health careantipsychoticsuser organizationsmental health discourses
spellingShingle Olav Nyttingnes
Olav Nyttingnes
Jorun Rugkåsa
Jorun Rugkåsa
The Introduction of Medication-Free Mental Health Services in Norway: An Analysis of the Framing and Impact of Arguments From Different Standpoints
Frontiers in Psychiatry
medication-free treatment
coercion
mental health care
antipsychotics
user organizations
mental health discourses
title The Introduction of Medication-Free Mental Health Services in Norway: An Analysis of the Framing and Impact of Arguments From Different Standpoints
title_full The Introduction of Medication-Free Mental Health Services in Norway: An Analysis of the Framing and Impact of Arguments From Different Standpoints
title_fullStr The Introduction of Medication-Free Mental Health Services in Norway: An Analysis of the Framing and Impact of Arguments From Different Standpoints
title_full_unstemmed The Introduction of Medication-Free Mental Health Services in Norway: An Analysis of the Framing and Impact of Arguments From Different Standpoints
title_short The Introduction of Medication-Free Mental Health Services in Norway: An Analysis of the Framing and Impact of Arguments From Different Standpoints
title_sort introduction of medication free mental health services in norway an analysis of the framing and impact of arguments from different standpoints
topic medication-free treatment
coercion
mental health care
antipsychotics
user organizations
mental health discourses
url https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.685024/full
work_keys_str_mv AT olavnyttingnes theintroductionofmedicationfreementalhealthservicesinnorwayananalysisoftheframingandimpactofargumentsfromdifferentstandpoints
AT olavnyttingnes theintroductionofmedicationfreementalhealthservicesinnorwayananalysisoftheframingandimpactofargumentsfromdifferentstandpoints
AT jorunrugkasa theintroductionofmedicationfreementalhealthservicesinnorwayananalysisoftheframingandimpactofargumentsfromdifferentstandpoints
AT jorunrugkasa theintroductionofmedicationfreementalhealthservicesinnorwayananalysisoftheframingandimpactofargumentsfromdifferentstandpoints
AT olavnyttingnes introductionofmedicationfreementalhealthservicesinnorwayananalysisoftheframingandimpactofargumentsfromdifferentstandpoints
AT olavnyttingnes introductionofmedicationfreementalhealthservicesinnorwayananalysisoftheframingandimpactofargumentsfromdifferentstandpoints
AT jorunrugkasa introductionofmedicationfreementalhealthservicesinnorwayananalysisoftheframingandimpactofargumentsfromdifferentstandpoints
AT jorunrugkasa introductionofmedicationfreementalhealthservicesinnorwayananalysisoftheframingandimpactofargumentsfromdifferentstandpoints