Interprofessional dynamics that promote client empowerment in mental health practice: A social work perspective

Abstract

Summary Interprofessional practice has been broadly endorsed as a strategy which supports the delivery of high-quality health services. Few studies have addressed the dynamics inherent to interprofessional mental health practice in an era in which client empowerment is prioritised and valued. Social work perspectives are also underexplored in the studies which have been published on interprofessional health care, despite the increasingly important role of this discipline in community mental health contexts. Through a thematic analysis of 26 semi-structured interviews, this study explored the perspectives of mental health social workers located in two geographically and culturally distinctive sites (Hong Kong and Sydney), and identified a strong theme encompassing their concerns about the facilitation of client empowerment in interprofessional settings. Findings Participant accounts direct attention to the strategies required to co-constitute the shared territories of the different mental health professions. Findings also highlight the frustration with recent mental health reforms which aim to challenge power differentials in interprofessional decision-making. Strategies were proposed for supporting the construction of shared language among different professions, revealing the creativity and insight of practitioners in managing the conflicts arising from interactions between different professional knowledge systems. The comparison of Hong Kong and Sydney accounts highlights the importance of structural, political and cultural influences in supporting not only interprofessional collaboration but also the independence and effectiveness of distinct professional roles. Application This article provides unique insights which aim to strengthen the contribution of social work to interprofessional practice in the promotion of empowerment-oriented interprofessional practice and education.

Empowering Chinese university health service providers to become mental health champions: insights from the ACE-LYNX intervention

“…This study found that there are diverse perspectives and divergences in empowerment action among MHSPs. This is consistent with the findings of previous studies on the understanding of multidisciplinary dynamics in promoting empowerment in mental health practice (90). This may be related to the fact that empowerment itself is a multifaceted concept (87), as well as to the disciplinary boundaries and cultures of the values of different professions, as revealed by studies of multidisciplinary collaborative empowerment.…”

Emerging practice, map-in-progress: a social work practice model

“…Within the hierarchal yet collaborative setting of interprofessional primary health care, researchers have identified particular issues; these issues mirror my experience within my practicum context. At times, interprofessional teams have been shown to result in poor outcomes for the client as space for advocacy, social justice, or client empowerment is not prioritized (Cui et al, 2022). The role of social worker as advocate has been shown to sometime result in conflict within interprofessional teams (Ambrose-Miller & Ashcroft, 2016).…”

“…The role of social worker as advocate has been shown to sometime result in conflict within interprofessional teams (Ambrose-Miller & Ashcroft, 2016). Power differentials within decision-making processes may regulate social work perspectives to the bottom of the hierarchy (Ambrose-Miller & Ashcroft, 2016;Cui et al, 2022). Tensions are inherent between the medical model of symptom management and social work's emphasis on empowerment (Cui et al, 2022) and human rights.…”

“…Power differentials within decision-making processes may regulate social work perspectives to the bottom of the hierarchy (Ambrose-Miller & Ashcroft, 2016;Cui et al, 2022). Tensions are inherent between the medical model of symptom management and social work's emphasis on empowerment (Cui et al, 2022) and human rights. Role ambiguity continues to serve as a source of concern (Ambrose-Miller & Ashcroft, 2016;Döbl et al, 2015;O'Brien & Calderwood, 2010;Tadic et al, 2020).…”