Rethinking self-injury recovery: a commentary and conceptual reframing

Lewis, Stephen P.; Hasking, Penelope

doi:10.1192/bjb.2019.51

Cited by 34 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 24 publications

(50 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consistent with growing work in the field, we view recovery as nonlinear (Lewis & Hasking, 2020; Lewis et al, 2019). Importantly, and in stark contrast to the voluminous deficit‐based NSSI literature, we view recovery as a process during which individuals can cultivate personal fortitude, meaning, and resilience by way of finding new ways to cope and relating to the self.…”

Section: A Person‐centered Recovery Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 62%

“…To summarize, within medical models, recovery from a disease or condition involves the amelioration of the cause of disease, and subsequent absence of the symptoms of the disease; recovery is viewed as a return to “normal” functioning (Lewis & Hasking, 2020). However, when applied to NSSI, the absence of self‐injury (rather than the cause of it) is often viewed as the treatment target—the goal of recovery.…”

Section: Research On Nssi Recoverymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Given its nonlinear nature, recovery inevitably has ebbs and flows (e.g., Lewis & Hasking, 2020; Lewis et al, 2019). In consonance with this, it is not uncommon for people to self‐injure over the course of recovery, even after periods of not self‐injuring (Lewis et al, 2019).…”

Section: Realistic Expectations and Setbacksmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed, it is likely that many individuals will continue to experience some degree of future NSSI ideation, even if ephemeral. Building on this, it would be imperative for individuals with lived experience to know that thoughts (and urges) may never fully go away (Lewis & Hasking, 2020). Importantly, their presence does not mean a failure to recover.…”

Section: Normalizing Thoughts and Urgesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Understandably, given the significant shame and stigma associated with NSSI (e.g., Long, 2018; Staniland et al, 2020), many individuals are reluctant to share their experiences (Rosenrot & Lewis, 2018). Yet, for many people, disclosing NSSI may be a critical part of the recovery experience (Lewis & Hasking, 2020). For instance, some individuals may seek others’ support to initiate or augment recovery (e.g., Hasking et al, 2015).…”

Section: Navigating Disclosuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Self‐injury recovery: A person‐centered framework

Lewis

Hasking

2020

J Clin Psychol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Growing interest has been paid to the concept of non‐suicidal self‐injury (NSSI) recovery. In research, and sometimes clinical practice, the focus has been on NSSI cessation, with recovery operationalised with reference to the time since someone last self‐injured. Yet, perspectives from people with lived experience of NSSI indicate that recovery is much more complex. Drawing on recent empirical work, and the voices of people with lived experience of NSSI, we outline a new framework for conceptualizing NSSI recovery. We argue that recovery is nonlinear and multifaceted, comprising: Realistic Expectations and Setbacks; Normalizing Thoughts and Urges; Fostering Self‐efficacy; Identifying Strengths; Finding Alternatives; Addressing Underlying Adversities; Addressing and Accepting Scarring; Navigating Disclosures; and Self‐acceptance. In presenting research and clinical implications of this new framework, we propose that this framing offers a more complete understanding of NSSI recovery—one conducive to optimizing wellbeing and promoting resilience among individuals with lived experience.

show abstract

Section: A Person‐centered Recovery Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 62%

Section: Research On Nssi Recoverymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Realistic Expectations and Setbacksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Normalizing Thoughts and Urgesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Navigating Disclosuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Self‐injury recovery: A person‐centered framework

Lewis

Hasking

2020

J Clin Psychol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A qualitative study on lived experience of self‐harm in South Asians in the UK: From reasons to recovery

Özen-Dursun

Panagioti

Alharbi

et al. 2023

Clin Psychology and Psychoth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesSelf‐harm rates and clinical presentations differ by ethnicity. South Asian women are at risk of self‐harm. Previous research suggested investigating individuals' experiences with self‐harm with qualitative studies in developing self‐harm prevention strategies. This research aims to explore self‐harm experiences among South Asians in the United Kingdom.DesignQualitative study.MethodsParticipants were recruited via third‐sector organizations and online platforms. Semi‐structured interviews were conducted with 11 South Asian individuals with a history of self‐harm living in the United Kingdom. The data were analysed based on a reflective thematic analysis approach.ResultsResults revealed four main themes: (1) reasons for self‐harm; (2) recovery journey; (3) culture and mental health; and (4) the transition to suicidal thoughts and behaviours. Reasons for self‐harm included negative life circumstances, social life difficulties, challenges faced during COVID‐19 and mental health problems. Participants described their recovery journey by acknowledging the role of professional help, self‐care, psychoeducation and personal growth, improving social relationships, and faith and spirituality. Cultural factors included generational differences and stigma. Culturally adapted psychological interventions were perceived as promising. The reported transition from self‐harm to suicidal behaviours was linked to experiencing major stressful life events and the use of severe methods of self‐harm.ConclusionsThe findings suggest that socio‐cultural factors impact mental health and recovery processes among South Asians. Mental health services should consider improving culturally sensitive clinical practices in responding to self‐harm among South Asian communities.

show abstract

Cognitive and emotional factors associated with the desire to cease non‐suicidal self‐injury

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Due to cognitive and emotional differences between individuals who have and have not stopped selfinjuring, we explored these in the context of desire to stop. Method: Australian university students (n = 374) completed cognitive and emotional measures. Comparisons were made between those who had self-injured in the past 12 months and those who had not, and between individuals who reported wanting to stop self-injuring and those who did not. Results: Approximately 20% of participants did not want to stop self-injuring. Cognitive emotional factors (psychological distress, self-efficacy to resist, difficulties regulating emotion, interpersonal functions, and outcome expectancies) differentiated individuals who had and had not stopped, but could not explain differences in desire to stop. Conclusion: Factors associated with desire to stop are not the same as factors underlying behavioural cessation. Motivational approaches to changes in self-injurious behaviour would be beneficial for clinicians and their clients.

show abstract

Rethinking self-injury recovery: a commentary and conceptual reframing

Cited by 34 publications

References 24 publications

Self‐injury recovery: A person‐centered framework

Self‐injury recovery: A person‐centered framework

A qualitative study on lived experience of self‐harm in South Asians in the UK: From reasons to recovery

Cognitive and emotional factors associated with the desire to cease non‐suicidal self‐injury

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About