Recovery constructs and the continued debate that limits consumer recovery

Area of Science:

• Mental Health
• Psychology
• Social Sciences

Background:

• The concept of recovery is shaped by longitudinal studies and the consumer-survivor movement.
• Existing frameworks attempt to differentiate recovery constructs, leading to proposed taxonomies.

Purpose of the Study:

• To critically examine the proposed taxonomies of recovery.
• To assess the validity and helpfulness of distinguishing recovery constructs.

Main Methods:

• Comparative analysis of recovery constructs from different influences.
• Examination of recovery taxonomies through a consumer perspective.

Main Results:

• Two main taxonomies were identified: 'recovery from' vs. 'recovery in' and 'recovery as an outcome' vs. 'recovery as a process'.
• Both proposed taxonomies were found to limit the consumer recovery paradigm.

Conclusions:

• The dichotomous distinctions in recovery constructs are neither valid nor helpful.
• The mental health field should avoid dualistic approaches to recovery.
• Progress in recovery-based services requires a move beyond simplistic either/or frameworks.