Individuals with a substance use disorder (SUD) often have fewer social support network resources than those without SUDs. This qualitative study examined the role of social relationships in achieving and maintaining stable recovery after many years of SUD. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 18 participants, each of whom had been diagnosed with a SUD and each of whom had been abstinent for at least 5 years. A resource group of peer consultants in long-term recovery from SUDs contributed to the study planning, preparation, and initial analyses. The relationship that most participants described as helpful for initiating abstinence was recognition by a peer or a caring relationship with a service provider or sibling. These findings suggest that, to reach and maintain abstinence, it is important to maintain positive relationships and to engage self-agency to protect oneself from the influences of negative relationships. Substance use disorder service providers should increase the extent to which they involve the social networks of clients when designing new treatment approaches. Service providers should also focus more on individualizing services to meet their clients on a personal level, without neglecting professionalism or treatment strategies.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore how, and under what conditions, professionals involve relatives in clinical practice. Design/methodology/approach Two cases were constructed from two studies in Denmark, theoretically inspired by Bourdieu’s concepts of doxa and position and analyzed with focus on the involvement of relatives from the perspective of professionals. Findings Support to relatives in practice is rarely included in the way that treatment and care are organized in healthcare. Professionals’ views of the involvement of relatives were characterized by the values of neoliberal ideology and medical-professional rationality, in which relatives are not regarded as a subject of care and support in clinical practice. The involvement of relatives aimed to ensure patients’ participation in randomized clinical trial and to help professionals to care for patients when the professionals were not absolutely needed. Professionals were relatively higher positioned in the clinic than relatives were, which allowed professionals to in – and exclude relatives. Neoliberal ideology and medical-professional rationality go hand in hand when it comes to patient treatment, care and the involvement of relatives; it is all about efficiency, treatment optimization and increased social control of the diagnosed patient. These neoliberal, organizational values consolidate doxa of the medical field and the positions that govern the meeting with patients’ relatives – if it takes place at all. Originality/value The results put into perspective how the combination of neoliberalism and medical logic work as an organizing principle in contemporary healthcare systems, and challenge a normative, humanistic view on involving patients’ relatives in the medical clinic.

The present study is a part of a broader multisited field study on involvement of relatives in Danish psychiatry. The article aims to elucidate which political classifications of normality and mental illness that are displayed in two health political campaigns regarding anti-stigmatization and social inclusion and how such classifications co-constitute the subjectivity of individuals suffering from mental illness and their relatives. Drawing on a discourse theoretical perspective laid out by political theorists Laclau and Mouffe, we analyze how the campaigns bring into effect a weak and ineffective subject of deviance and how it is constituted by a subject of normality characterized by opposing traits. The article takes up the discussion of how the campaigns' articulations of the subjects of normality and deviance are imbedded in a hegemonic discourse of neoliberalism and individualism that asserts involvement as an expanded division of responsibility for the identification, classification and regulation of mentally ill subjects between public and private spheres of the Danish welfare state.

This article gives an account of aspects of a multi-sited field study of involvement of relatives in Danish psychiatry. By following metaphors of involvement across three sites of the psychiatric system-a family site, a clinical site and a policy site-the first author (J.O.) investigated how, and on what grounds, involvement of relatives is perceived in Danish psychiatry. Paradoxically, the current understanding of involvement of relatives fails to take into consideration the perspectives of the relatives per se and families that were being studied. By analyzing involvement from a discourse theoretical perspective laid out by Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe, the aim of this study is to show how the dominant discourse about involvement at the political and clinical sites is constituted by understandings of mentally ill individuals and by political objectives of involvement. The analysis elucidates how a psycho-ideological discourse positions the mentally ill person as weak, incapable, and ineffective. By contrast, the supporting relative is positioned as a strong, capable, and effective co-therapist. Furthermore, the analysis considers how this dominant discourse of involvement is constituted by a broader discourse of neoliberalism and market orientation, which justifies involvement as a subtle institutionalization of social control. The article highlights that the role of the relative as a co-therapist may be contested by the families' discourse, which emphasizes issues concerning the responsibility toward the mental health of the ill individual as well as toward the psychological milieu of the family.

During an ethnographic field work in Danish psychiatry taking place between 2011 and 2013, the emergence of an exemplary textbook symbolized a dominant perception of the relationship between psychiatric nursing professionals and patients that contextualized their ways of involving the patient in clinical practice. Drawing on the discourse theory of Laclau and Mouffe, this article elucidates how this particular textbook articulates the relation between two gendered subjects: a dominant and caring mother, and a childlike male patient. This article takes up the discussion about how nursing discourse is embedded in a range of ideological structures about gender, theory of science and ethics of the psychiatric field. It proceeds to discuss what possibilities and problems it delineates for the nursing profession and for patients, and involvement and recovery of patients in daily clinical practice.