‘Recovery’ is usually taken as broadly equivalent to ‘getting back to normal’ or ‘cure’, and by these standards few people with severe mental illness recover. At the heart of the growing interest in recovery is a radical redefinition of what recovery means to those with severe mental health problems. Redefinition of recovery as a process of personal discovery, of how to live (and to live well) with enduring symptoms and vulnerabilities opens the possibility of recovery to all. The ‘recovery movement’ argues that this reconceptualisation is personally empowering, raising realistic hope for a better life alongside whatever remains of illness and vulnerability. This paper explores the background and defining features of the international recovery movement, its influence and impact on contemporary psychiatric practice, and steps towards developing recovery-based practice and services.

Recovery has come to mean living a life beyond mental illness, and recovery orientation is policy in many countries. The aims of this study were to investigate what staff say they do to support recovery and to identify what they perceive as barriers and facilitators associated with providing recovery-oriented support. Data collection included ten focus groups with multidisciplinary clinicians (n = 34) and team leaders (n = 31), and individual interviews with clinicians (n = 18), team leaders (n = 6) and senior managers (n = 8). The identified core category was Competing Priorities, with staff identifying conflicting system priorities that influence how recovery-oriented practice is implemented. Three sub-categories were: Health Process Priorities, Business Priorities, and Staff Role Perception. Efforts to transform services towards a recovery orientation require a whole-systems approach.

“Extreme psychotic states offer a human parable … patients see into the depths which do not belong so much to their illness as themselves as individuals with their own historical truth … in psychotic reality we find an abundance of content representing fundamental problems in philosophy …. The philosopher in us cannot but be fascinated by this extraordinary reality and to feel its challenge.” (Jaspers, 1963)

“Once the patient's biography becomes part of the care, the possibility that therapy will dehumanise the patient, stripping him of what is unique to his illness experience becomes much less likely” (Kleinman, 1988).“The loss of story making and telling has its impact on failure to care for the long term chronic or incurable patient” (Hunter, 1991).

SummaryProfessional practice explicitly focused on supporting the recovery of those it serves is broadly backed by an emerging profile of necessary knowledge, key skills and innovative collaborations, although there is no universally accepted practice ‘model’. This article outlines these components and discusses the associated need for change in the culture of provider organisations along with implementation of wider social and economic policies to support peoples' recovery and social inclusion. This is a values-led approach supported by persuasive advocacy and international endorsement but still in need of further development, systematic evaluation and confirmatory evidence.