+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Posted Thu, 19 Nov 2009 13:42:55
This message was forwarded through MEDSOCNEWS.
If you wish to make an announcement or publicise
an event then please send the text to:
[log in to unmask]
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

*Mental Health Qualitative Research Network (MHQRN) meeting*

* *

*20 January 2010, 2.30pm – 4.30pm*

*College Research Unit, 6^th Floor Boardroom, *

*21 Mansell Street**, London, E1 8AA***

* *

* *

* *

* *

Presentation 1:

*“Learning to live with OCD is a little mantra I often repeat”: 
exploring the lived experience of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD)*

/Helen Murphy and Ramesh Perera-Delcourt, University of East London/

* *

We were interested in the lived experience of people who self-identified 
with Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD) especially with regard to how 
individuals understood the origins of their OCD and how they had 
experienced therapy. This has previously been little explored. Our focus 
was to explore and understand psychosocial aspects of the condition and 
its treatment rather than concentrating on more medicalised 
understandings of OCD or concentrating on the psychopathy assumed to 
underlie the condition.

Data for the study came from a series of nine semi-structured interviews 
carried out with individuals who self-identified as having OCD. 
Participants were recruited through two leading UK-based OCD charities - 
the national website and members magazine of OCD-UK and local support 
groups publicised by OCD-UK and OCD Action. Using a semi-structured 
interview format, we asked participants to tell us about the experiences 
they had with the condition, the factors that they thought contributed 
to their OCD and whether they thought that identifying these factors 
would be beneficial in therapeutic treatment.

Interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed and we used 
Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) to analyse the accounts. 
Participants gave feedback as to the validity of the themes in early 
stages of analysis. We identified three superordinate themes - Living 
with OCD, The Therapeutic Alliance and Awareness, Recognition and Social 
Support for OCD. These themes are examined against current and future 
treatment and service delivery where Cognitive-Behavioural Therapy (CBT) 
is a standard intervention and where cost-effective treatments such as 
Computer-aided CBT (CCBT) are promoted. Contemporary understandings 
about mental health for both clinical and non-clinical populations are 
also interpreted in the light of collected research findings.

* *

* *

Presentation 2:

*Judgements of the plausibility of potentially delusional claims: A 
discursive analysis of professionals’ accounts*


      /David Harper, Reader in Clinical Psychology//, //University// of
      East London///

One of the key judgements mental health professionals make in judging 
whether a statement reflects a delusional belief is its plausibility. 
Maher has argued that the assessment of the plausibility of beliefs is 
'typically made by a clinician on the basis of "common sense," and not 
on the basis of a systematic evaluation of empirical data' (1992, 
p.261). This raises an interesting contradiction: on the one hand the 
implicit claim of psychiatric diagnosis of delusions is that a belief is 
false; yet many beliefs are unfalsifiable within the context of a 
diagnostic interview (Georgaca, 2004).

Despite this contradiction, there has been relatively little empirical 
investigation of how this contradiction is resolved by professionals. An 
earlier study of mine (Harper, 1994) identified that professionals used 
the repertoire of psychiatric diagnostic criteria flexibly and this 
appeared to serve a range of social functions. The current paper extends 
this research by reporting the results of a study in which twelve 
professionals were interviewed (five General Practitioners, three 
Community Psychiatric Nurses and four psychiatrists) in relation to 
their judgements of the plausibility of the beliefs of nine service 
users on their caseloads.

In my analysis of the interviews with the professionals, I will describe 
some of the discursive strategies used to mark out certain beliefs as 
implausible. I will draw on a range of extracts to show how such 
judgements of plausibility rely on certain taken-for-granted and 
contestable assumptions about the plausibility of beliefs.

Presentation 3:


      Whose Study is This? Ethical Quandaries of Qualitative Research

/Gail A. Hornstein, Professor of Psychology, Mount Holyoke College (USA) 
and Visiting Research Fellow, Birkbeck Institute for Social Research, 
University of London/

This presentation will outline a number of key ethical issues that face 
qualitative researchers in mental health. Although every methodology 
involves ethical decision-making, qualitative research, especially in 
the contentious and complex area of mental health, poses special 
challenges. Among the questions to be discussed are these: Should 
participants have an opportunity to comment on analyses/descriptions of 
their own experience prior to publication? Should interview transcripts 
be ‘cleaned up’ to remove grammatical infelicities, false starts, 
pauses, etc. that do not change the meaning of what is said but make the 
participant seem more articulate? When is it appropriate to include 
oneself, as the researcher, in the write-up of the study? Are there 
circumstances when it is more ethical to use the real names of 
participants, rather than pseudonyms, in a research report? Is ‘going 
native’ ever an advantageous strategy? When we write about people who 
have been psychiatric patients, are we speaking for them, for ourselves, 
or for authorities in the mental health system? Examples from the 
research and writing process for my recent book, /Agnes's Jacket: A 
Psychologist's Search for the Meanings of Madness/ (New York: Rodale, 
2009), will be used to illustrate these quandaries and to suggest solutions.

*About MHQRN*

The Mental Health Qualitative Research Network (MHQRN) provides an 
opportunity for people doing qualitative research in the area of mental 
health to meet and discuss methodological challenges and innovations. 
The network meets every six months and is convened by Alan Quirk from 
the Royal College of Psychiatrists and John Larsen from Rethink.

If you wish to be added to the MHQRN emailing list please contact Alan 
Quirk: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>

**********************************************************************
1. For general enquires or problems with the list or to CHANGE YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS send a message to:
[log in to unmask]
2. To suspend yourself from the list, whilst on leave, for example,
send an email to [log in to unmask] with the following message:
set medsocnews nomail
3. To resume email from the list, send the following message:
set medsocnews mail
4. To leave MedSocNews, send an email to [log in to unmask] with the message (leave the subject line blank and do not include a signature):
leave medsocnews
5. To join or subscribe to MedSocNews, send an email to [log in to unmask] with the message (leave the subject line blank and do not include a signature):
SUBSCRIBE medsocnews firstname lastname
6. Further information about the medsocnews discussion list (including
list archive and how to subscribe to or leave the list) can be found
at the list web site:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/medsocnews.html
**********************************************************************