Stigma, negative attitudes and discrimination towards mental illness within the nursing profession: a review of the literature

Ross, Charlotte A.; Goldner, Elliot M.

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2850.2009.01399.x

Cited by 315 publications

(299 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

258

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A recent review of the general nursing literature 25 showed that nurses held hostile attitudes toward people who had self-harmed, often viewing them as squandering precious health care resources intended to save lives. Emergency department nurses and those in intensive care units were among the most hostile toward self-harming patients and were often openly unsympathetic and demeaning.…”

Section: Stigmatization By Health Providersmentioning

confidence: 99%

From Sin to Science: Fighting the Stigmatization of Mental Illnesses

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our paper provides an overview of current stigma discourse, the origins and nature of the stigma associated with mental illnesses, stigmatization by health providers, and approaches to stigma reduction. This is a narrative review focusing on seminal works from the social and psychological literature, with selected qualitative and quantitative studies and international policy documents to highlight key points. Stigma discourse has increasingly moved toward a human rights model that views stigma as a form of social oppression resulting from a complex sociopolitical process that exploits and entrenches the power imbalance between people who stigmatize and those who are stigmatized. People who have a mental illness have identified mental health and health providers as key contributors to the stigmatization process and worthy targets of antistigma interventions. Six approaches to stigma reduction are described: education, protest, contact-based education, legislative reform, advocacy, and stigma self-management. Stigma denigrates the value of people who have a mental illness and the social and professional support systems designed to support them. It creates inequities in funding and service delivery that undermine recovery and full social participation. Mental health professionals have often been identified as part of the problem, but they can redress this situation by becoming important partners in antistigma work. W W WNotre article offre un aperçu du discours actuel sur les stigmates, des origines et de la nature des stigmates associés à la maladie mentale, de la stigmatisation par les prestataires de soins de santé, et des approches de la réduction des stigmates. Il s'agit d'une revue narrative qui porte sur les ouvrages précurseurs de la littérature sociale et psychologique, et présente des études qualitatives et quantitatives ainsi que des documents de politique internationaux pour faire ressortir les points importants. Le discours sur les stigmates glisse de plus en plus vers un modèle fondé sur les droits de la personne qui voit les stigmates comme une forme d'oppression sociale issue d'un processus sociopolitique complexe qui exploite et fortifie le déséquilibre du pouvoir entre les personnes qui stigmatisent et celles qui sont stigmatisées. Les personnes qui souffrent d'une maladie mentale ont identifié les prestataires de soins de santé mentale et de santé comme étant les principaux contributeurs au processus de stigmatisation, ce qui en fait des sujets parfaits pour les interventions anti-stigmates. Six approches de la réduction des stigmates sont décrites : éducation, protestation, éducation par le contact direct, réforme législative, défense des droits, et autogestion des stigmates. Les stigmates dénigrent la valeur des personnes souffrant d'une maladie mentale ainsi que les systèmes de soutien professionnel conçus pour les aider. Ils créent des inégalités dans le financement et la prestation de services qui minent le rétablissement et la pleine participation sociale. Les professionnels de la santé men...

show abstract

Section: Stigmatization By Health Providersmentioning

confidence: 99%

From Sin to Science: Fighting the Stigmatization of Mental Illnesses

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Individuals are often blamed for their selfharmful behavior, with their acts often interpreted in a limited and stigmatized manner, frequently as "attention-seeking" and "manipulative" in nature (Long, Manktelow, & Tracey, 2013;McCann, Clark, McConnachie, & Harvey, 2007;Ross & Goldner, 2009). Self-harm can evoke strong emotional reactions, with disclosures eliciting responses of confusion, frustration, anger, fear, anxiety, discomfort, and even disgust (Heath, Toste, Sornberger, & Wagner, 2011;Long et al, 2013;Marzano, Adler, & Ciclitira, 2015).…”

Section: Public Attitudes and Helpingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public perceptions of self-harm—A test of an attribution model of public discrimination.

Nielsen¹,

Townsend²

2018

Stigma and Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study applied Corrigan, Markowitz, Watson, Rowan, and Kubiak’s (2003) attribution model of public discrimination toward individuals with mental ill-health to explore public perceptions of self-harm—an underresearched topic, given the size and scale of the problem of self-harm. Participants (community-based adult sample, N = 355, aged 18–67 years) were presented with 1 of 10, first-person, vignettes describing an episode of adolescent self-harm and completed self-report measures assessing dispositional empathy, familiarity with self-harm (professional; personal), perceived dangerousness, personal responsibility beliefs, emotional responses toward the person depicted in the vignette and helping/rejecting intentions. Vignettes were manipulated across conditions for the controllability of the stated cause (controllable; uncontrollable; unknown), stated motivation for self-harm (intrapersonal; interpersonal; unknown) and presentation format (video; text). Across the sample, attitudes were largely tolerant, with significantly higher levels of sympathetic than fearful or angry responding and significantly higher endorsement of helping responses than avoidance, segregative or coercive approaches. The manipulation of controllability of cause (controllable; uncontrollable), but not stated motivation (intrapersonal; interpersonal), was related to differences in cognitive, emotional or behavioral responding. Taken together, results were largely consistent with the attribution model, suggesting this may be a useful framework for understanding public perceptions of self-harm.

show abstract

“…This tool consisted of 17 items with 5 point likert scale (originally the tool had 7 point likert scale) with three domains namely; Consumer capacity (8 items), Consumer involvement (5 items) and Consumer as staff (4 items). Respondents were given the choice of five response categories to tick based on their feelings from disagree strongly (1) to agree strongly (5). In this study, "Mental health consumer" or "consumer" is defined as a person who is currently using mental health services as either an in-patient or out-patient.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…4 However, health professionals' attitudes have been identified as a barrier to inclusion of consumers into mental health services. 5 Research suggests that there is a need to change the mental health professionals' attitudes in encouraging clients to participate actively in planning, development, delivery and evaluation of mental health services. 6,7 On the other hand, emerging evidence suggests that mental health education influences positively on attitudes of nursing 8,9 and medical 10 undergraduates towards persons with mental illness.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%