A comparison of formal and informal help in the context of mental health recovery.

François Lauzier-Jobin,Janie Houle

doi:10.1177/00207640211004988

François Lauzier-Jobin, Janie Houle

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1177/00207640211004988

Copy DOI

Abstract

Background:People in recovery from anxiety, depressive or bipolar disorders can receive both formal (from practitioners) and informal help (from family and friends). These two types of helping relationships have often been studied separately as either therapeutic relationships or social support. Yet, the mechanisms of these two forms of help have not been empirically compared in the context of mental health recovery.Aims:The purpose of this study is to compare the mechanisms of informal help and formal help in recovery by combining the perspectives of individuals in recovery, their informal helper and their practitioner.Method:Individual interviews were conducted with 15 triads (N = 45 participants) comprising a person in recovery, their most significant informal helper and their most significant practitioner to compare the two forms of help through a mixed method approach. Based on the paradigm of critical realism, the research puts the emphasis on the triangulation of data sources and types.Results:The informal and formal helping relationships serve multiple functions some can be found in both, often in different ways (communication, presence and availability). Informal helpers tend to serve a broader array of functions than practitioners do. Regarding differences, formal help is characterised by scheduling, time limitations and professional competencies. Informal help is characterised by emotional closeness, companionship and reciprocity. Also, people in recovery are active when it comes to determining the role that their helpers play (agency).Conclusions:Social support from family members and friends, as well as help from professionals can contribute to recovery in different ways. Attesting to the agency of people in recovery, the two forms of help are not only perceived as complementary, they are deliberately kept so.

Highlights

In their lifetime, 12% of all people will suffer from a depressive disorder, 11% to 12% from an anxiety disorder and 2.2% from a bipolar disorder (Kairouz et al, 2008; Patten et al, 2006; Schaffer et al, 2006)
The people in recovery had a mean age of 54.4 years (SD = 12.4; min = 30; max = 70) and reported suffering from a bipolar disorder (8), depressive disorder (6) and/or an anxiety disorder (5)
The quantitative part of the study revealed that the informal and formal helping relationships served a wide array of functions

Summary

Introduction

12% of all people will suffer from a depressive disorder, 11% to 12% from an anxiety disorder and 2.2% from a bipolar disorder (Kairouz et al, 2008; Patten et al, 2006; Schaffer et al, 2006). While trajectories vary across individuals, recovery is possible, it is the most likely outcome of their journey (Leonhardt et al, 2017; Slade & Longden, 2015) To recover, they may receive informal help from family and friends, and formal help from practitioners (Bird et al, 2014; Leamy et al, 2011; Slade, 2012; Tew et al, 2012; Thomas et al, 2018; van Weeghel et al, 2019). People in recovery from anxiety, depressive or bipolar disorders can receive both formal (from practitioners) and informal help (from family and friends) These two types of helping relationships have often been studied separately as either therapeutic relationships or social support. Attesting to the agency of people in recovery, the two forms of help are perceived as complementary, they are deliberately kept so

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion