• Home
  • Membership
  • Partners
  • Projects and Dissemination
  • Resources
  • The Ideal Ward Round
  • Clinical Psychology Bite-Size
  • Newsflash
  • Blog
  • Contact Us

Critical Values Based Practice Network

C-VBP-N

  • Home
  • Projects and Dissemination
  • The development of an alternative model to promote shared decision making in mental health in-patient care

The development of an alternative model to promote shared decision making in mental health in-patient care

Written by Gemma Stacey on March 22, 2014. Posted in Projects and Dissemination

The development of an alternative model to promote shared decision making in mental health in-patient care

Project summary: This project considered what a shared decision making model might need to look like if it were able to acknowledge hierarchies and the effects of power in order to promote a radical level of transparency within the decision making process. Whilst it is important for professional groups to maintain their professional identities in healthcare settings, they might also need to consider the importance of talking about these identities within multidisciplinary groups and acknowledge uncertainties of role and identity when the power to decide is shared amongst professional groups, service users and carers. It is suggested that the concept of shared decision making should be broken down into its component parts. Borrowing a phrase from communication theory, we need to specify the “core conditions” for a shared decision to take place (Rogers 1957). We suggest that in order for this, to occur, all participants must be Informed, Involved and Influential (the three I’s) in the decision making process. However, the three “I”s of shared decision making are fluid, they refer to a sliding scale of influence that moves between these different positions depending on context, capacity and desire to influence. This model draws upon established theories of participation which recognises how the distribution of power results in a ladder of participation ranging from non-participation, which is viewed as manipulation, to involvement which can encompass consultancy but is also regarded as tokenism. Full participation is achieved when a partnership is genuinely present and results in shared power (Arnstein 1969)

Dissemination:

Stacey, G., Felton, A., Houghton, P., Hui, A., Morgan, A., Shutt, J., Diamond, B,. Willis, M. & Stickley, T. (In press) Informed, Involved and Influential: The 3 I’s model of Shared Decision Making in Mental Health Care. Mental Health Practice

Share this:

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)

Related

Trackback from your site.

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Home
  • Membership
  • Partners
  • Projects and Dissemination
  • Resources
  • Newsflash
  • Contact Us
  • Home
  • Membership
  • Partners
  • Projects and Dissemination
  • Resources
  • The Ideal Ward Round
  • Clinical Psychology Bite-Size
  • Newsflash
  • Blog
  • Contact Us