Skin in the game: The professionalization of lived experience roles in mental health

Abstract

The lived experience workforce has moved from being a grassroots support and activist movement to become the fastest growing workforce within mental health. As lived experience work becomes assimilated within mainstream mental health service delivery, it faces mounting pressure to become more professionalized. Professionalization has evoked both optimism and fear, with diverging views within the lived experience workforce. In this paper, an assessment of the existing professionalization of the lived experience workforce is undertaken by drawing on theoretical positions and indices of what constitutes a profession. The arguments for and against professionalization are explored to identify the risks, benefits, and considerations for the lived experience workforce. The drive for professionalization has largely occurred due to the clinically focused mental health systems’ valuing of professional identity. The argument in favour of professionalization is motivated by a need for credibility within the views of that system, as well as greater regulation of the workforce. However, tensions are acknowledged with concerns that professionalization to appeal to the clinically focused system may lead to erosion of the values and uniqueness of lived experience work and nullify its effectiveness as an alternative and complementary role. Given mental health nurses are increasingly colleagues and often line managers of lived experience workers, it is important at this stage of lived experience workforce development that mental health nurses understand and are able to advocate for lived experience roles as a distinct professional discipline to help avoid the risks of co‐option to more dominant clinical practice.

Informing and Sustaining Participation of Lived Experience in the Suicide Prevention Workforce

“…For example, Huisman and van Bergen [ 22 ] highlighted that clarity is needed around the role of suicide prevention peer workers, and that this should be discussed between them and clinicians. Further, Roennfeldt and Byrne [ 41 ] referred to the professionalisation of the mental health LEW, highlighting concerns around professional identity and credibility of those with lived experience as viewed from within the system. In particular, they advocated for the role of lived experience to be seen as a distinct professional discipline.…”

“…The findings of the present study suggest that these questions are relevant for sustainability and feelings of being valued in their roles within the suicide prevention workforce, but the participants were less clear whether this distinction would be helpful or limiting. The issue of identity of lived experience, personal impacts of this lived experience, and whether there is a need for defining designated lived experience roles as a requirement to participate in this workforce has also been raised in other studies [ 20 , 41 , 42 ]. Open discussions about the distinctions and overlaps between LEW and non-LEW within the suicide prevention sector seem to be needed, since there is no clear and uniform answer in this case.…”

Omega-3 supplements in the prevention and treatment of youth depression and anxiety: A scoping review

“…Given the two aims, a scoping review approach was taken which also incorporated lived experience input in its design and interpretation of findings. Lived experience can aid in facilitating translatable and human-centered research in the mental health sphere (26).…”

“…Lived experience can aid in facilitating translatable and human-centered research in the mental health sphere (26).…”

“A Leader, That’s A Verb”: A Discursive Analysis of Lived Experience Leadership Per its Construction by People with Lived Experience

“…That is, without a de nition, other stakeholders may more easily replace the meaning of lived experience leadership as it is understood by people with lived experience with their own, more dominant conceptualisations of leadership 16,17 . As a consequence, and consistent with previous research ndings, other stakeholders may perceive as leadership and offer support only to practices replicating the status quo 18 .…”