You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
Currently, there is a fairly small research literature examining young people and their parents’ expectations and experiences of therapeutic interventions for child and adolescent mental health difficulties. Such research may evoke mixed feelings. On one level we may feel curious and open to feedback given in this broad way. However, it can also stir up feelings of anxiety, as we may worry about how findings will be interpreted, and the possibility for misunderstandings to occur.
Such research has the potential to be conflated with the elicitation of service user feedback, that has become standard practice in most national healthcare settings in the UK, and the current trend for ‘co-production’ of service development. While some of this feedback is related to general aspects of the service and clinical environment, patients are now also routinely asked for their views on their therapists’ ‘performance’. This can range from requests for subjective evaluation of therapist qualities and skills, to whether they and their therapist have completed certain tasks, for example, a crisis plan. Such feedback can allow a patient voice in advocating for service change but is also rife for misuse and misunderstanding. Commenting on individual clinicians needs context in order for it to be meaningful, but therapists also need space to exercise judgment; for example, they may choose not to use a session to make a crisis plan, when other forms of containment are called for.
This issue of the research digest has been loosely inspired by our recent JCP symposium on ethical publishing. In this, the patient voice/experience was at the centre, as we discussed the legal and moral imperative to involve them when we write about clinical work, and the necessity for informed consent. There is a power imbalance inherent in the patient-therapist relationship, and we have a duty to behave responsibly in that position. This dimension needs careful thought when asking for consent to publish; but it