Several studies in recent years have shown that recovery factors as experienced by clients are not always compatible with professional approaches. For example, clients often emphasise the importance of relationships and the satisfaction of universal human needs. The aim of the study has been to explore clients" descriptions of beneficial factors and to discuss the implications of those factors for the delivery of mental health services. Method has been qualitative content analysis of 347 user narratives. The study confirms findings in earlier recovery studies, but also demonstrates that the investigation of clients" stories leads to a range of existential dilemmas. Fundamental beliefs about what constitutes effective and necessary treatment are challenged. Recovery is a fundamentally personal process that involves finding a new sense of self and feeling of hope. Furthermore it is not only an internal process; it also requires external conditions that facilitate a positive culture of healing.

During the past decades, new approaches to synthesizing qualitative data have been developed. However, this methodology continues to face significant philosophical and practical challenges. By reviewing the literature on this topic, our overall aim in this article is to explore the systematic and creative research processes involved in the act of metasynthesizing. By investigating synthesizing processes borrowed from two studies, we discuss matters of transparency and transferability in relation to how multiple qualitative studies are interpreted and transformed into one narrative. We propose concepts such as bricolage, metaphor, playfulness, and abduction as ideas that might enhance understanding of the importance of combinations of scientific and artistic approaches to the way the synthesizer "puzzles together" an interpretive account of qualitative studies. This study can benefit researchers by increasing their awareness of the artistic processes involved in qualitative analysis and metasynthesis to expand the domain and methods of their fields.

No abstract

Integration and normalization are goals within the community-based care of people with mental illness. The implementation of this care policy has led to increased contact between people with mental illness and so-called normal people and society at large. But we know little about how this change affects the former patients' identity and experience of stigma and stereotyping. This study is based on qualitative interviews with people with mental illness (N=15) living in rural communities in four different municipalities. The focus in the study is on the informants' subjective experiences and the results show that they adapt in different ways, depending on how they negotiate their identity. Those who accept their role as "mental patients" seem to have easier access to services, they experience less stigmatization and fewer conflicts with their surroundings than those who oppose the patient role. Seem from our informants' perspectives there seems to be a simple definition of integration: Being integrated is feeling accepted as yourself. Some implications for policy and mental health services are discussed.

Escalating costs, increasing multi-morbidity, medically unexplained health problems, complex risk, poly-pharmacy and antibiotic resistance can be regarded as artefacts of the traditional knowledge production in Western medicine, arising from its particular worldview. Our paper presents a historically grounded critical analysis of this view. The materialistic shift of Enlightenment philosophy, separating subjectivity from bodily matter, became normative for modern medicine and yielded astonishing results. The traditional dichotomies of mind/body and subjective/objective are, however, incompatible with modern biological theory. Medical knowledge ignores central tenets of human existence, notably the physiological impact of subjective experience, relationships, history and sociocultural contexts. Biomedicine will not succeed in resolving today's poorly understood health problems by doing 'more of the same'. We must acknowledge that health, sickness and bodily functioning are interwoven with human meaning-production, fundamentally personal and biographical. This implies that the biomedical framework, although having engendered 'success stories' like the era of antibiotics, needs to be radically revised.