Experiences of Stigma in Forensic Psychiatric Patients
Research type
Research Study
Full title
Experiences of Stigma in Forensic Psychiatric Patients - a comparison with general psychiatric patients.
IRAS ID
123503
Contact name
Gill Mezey
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
South West London and St Georges NHS Mental Health Trust
Research summary
According to the Royal College of Psychiatrists’ Fair Deal (RCPsych 2008) and Time for Change (Henderson and Thornicroft 2013) campaigns, the greatest obstacle for people recovering from mental health problems is stigma and discrimination. The Mental Health and Social Inclusion report (2009) cited stigma as the main source of social exclusion for people with mental health problems. These reports make clear recommendations to reduce stigma, so that people who suffer from mental health problems do not feel marginalised in society.
There is limited research on stigma experienced by Forensic Psychiatric Service Users, who not only have mental health problems, but have also been convicted of serious violent offences. This study will explore experiences of stigma from the mental health service users perspective, using a validated measure of self reported stigma, the DISC – 12 (Thornicroft et al 2009,Brohan et al 2012) and differences between forensic and general adult service users. This is a 32 item self report scale comprising of four subscales : unfair treatment, stopping self; overcoming stigma and positive treatment. The scale has been shown to have good reliability, validity and acceptability (Brohan et al 2012) and has been used to evaluate experiences of stigma in individuals with schizophrenia and depression.
Individuals currently under the care of Forensic Inpatient or Community services will be asked to complete the DISC-12, which is a measure of stigma and discrimination and the Brief Psychiatric Rating scale which is a measure of levels of distress in psychotic patients. We shall recruit a comparison group of individuals currently under the care of general adult services and matched for diagnosis , age, gender, ethnicity and duration of inpatient care.REC name
London - Camberwell St Giles Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
13/LO/1153
Date of REC Opinion
16 Sep 2013
REC opinion
Further Information Favourable Opinion