Research on mental health has identified resilience to help people with mental illness, improve their wellbeing, and decrease mental health problems (Perlman et al., 2018). The authors cite the potential benefits of resilience for mental health consumers, who can live better upon developing it. Citing Davydov et al., Perlman et al. (2018) contend that resilience helps persons with mental illness improve relations with others, grow and gain new insights on the environment. Such a person’s temperament matures, and they are likely to develop problem-solving skills, self-efficacy, and social skills. The author’s hypothesis develops from evidence suggesting that some mental illness people cope better than others experiencing similar adversities. However, Perlman et al. (2018) caution that resilience is not a dichotomous issue that defines one’s ability to cope with mental illness; rather, it is a continuum process that defines and determines one’s response to life experiences. Research on the impact of resilience on persons with mental illness has grown over the last three decades following the positive impact and improvement of wellbeing exhibited by resilience among persons with mental illness. Perlman contends that there has been a shift from risk factors that cause mental illness to manage the condition, hence the focus on aspects such as resilience as a mental health management strategy. In a study of 106 consumers living with mental illness (40 male and 66 female), Perlman et al., (2018) examine resilience through the Self Determination Theory (SDT) lens and the potential of the model in understanding the motivation, influence and correlation constructs on resilience among people with mental illness: the authors found the model to be a “good fit for the proposed model” and motivation and self-determination as being critical to developing resilience among people with mental illness.
In the article, Perlman et al. (2018) propose a different approach to managing mental illness and provides an alternative to the conventional ways of improving persons’ welfare with the disease. Positively, and a step away from conventional research on mental illness that primarily focuses on risks associated with mental illness and its causes, the proposal by Perlman et al., (2018) could change the treatment of mental illness by building the capacity of the patients. The method proposed by the authors could also free resources currently employed to taking care of the mentally ill, which could be allocated elsewhere as patients with mental illness develop independence. Indeed, there have been calls and a need to improve mental health care using evidence-based practices and find non-medical ways to manage the condition. This follows evidence of the inadequacy of the dominant models of mental health care in solving complex challenges presented by the disease, accounting for nearly 30 percent of disability conditions globally (Lake and Turner, 2017). Perlman et al. ‘s argument also come after numerous studies demonstrating the relationship between resilience and better mental healthcare. However, for the first time, the authors provide insight into the relationship between mental illness and resilience – given that other scholars found persons with less resilience to have a low-quality life. Positively, The evidence presented by Perlman et al. (2018) on the effects of resilience in managing persons with on persons with mental illness is a positive move towards improving evidence-based care for mental illness conditions.
The article by Perlman et al. (2018) offers profound insight on Self Determination theory and the three critical psychological needs that influence motivation and delf determination and how self-determination can result in positive outcomes for persons with mental illness. Admittedly, this information is new to me. According to Perlman et al. (2018), three psychological needs (autonomy, competence, and relatedness) influence self-determination and control. As the authors explain, “self-determination is a psychological construct that is a measure of an individual’s motivation.” There are two levels of motivation and self-determination: “higher levels of self-determination which is associated with a more internal or intrinsic form of motivation and self-regulation, and low self-determination which is aligned with more external forms of motivation and motivation” (Perlman et al., 2018). The ability of an individual with mental illness to achieve their psychological needs thus requires self-determination and resilience. In most studies, the authors contend that “high levels of self-determination can be viewed positively, while lower levels are more negative.” In healthcare, Perlman et al. contend that “the inverse association between self-determination and levels of depression, anxiety and physiological symptoms associated with mental illness (meaning lower levels of anxiety are related to higher levels of self-determination).” However, given the broad scope of the discipline and the need to understand better the influence of self-determination on the psychological wellbeing of individuals, and despite pioneering a study on the role of self-determination and resilience in treating and managing mental illness, the authors admit that more studies are required to explore SDT and test the model before the results can be generalized.
After reading the article, it is my view that the approach to managing mental illness should change by reducing the dependence on drugs to treat the illness, educating medical professionals on the need and impact of resilience among mentally ill patients, and encouraging patients with mental illness to develop resilience for their independence. Despite the small sample size and a confined cohort, Perlman et al. (2018) could alter medical practices, including how medical practitioners manage mental illness. Conventional ways of managing the condition have been brutal, often confining patients to mental institutions and hospitals. Developing mental illness has subjected many to prejudicial treatment and subjected others to domiciliary care. However, the ability to enhance persons’ independence with mental illness is a welcome relief for medical professionals and relatives engaged in care that could lead to palliative care. Vacating expensive treatment methods used previously to manage mental illness conditions is also a relief for many. In this regard, there is a need to educate more people, directly and indirectly, to provide care for patients with mental illness on the potential success of implementing the Self Determination Theory. The training should also be extended to patients with mental illness conditions and inform them of the need to develop resilience.
Psychiatric diagnosis for persons requires an accurate understanding of the patient’s medical history, a psychosocial evaluation, and a comprehensive assessment performed by the practicing nurse. In the examination process, the nurse should examine for anxiety, which is an underlying cause of psychiatric diagnosis. The nurse should prioritize in discovering anxiety R/T obsessive thoughts. After these processes, the nurse should provide a safe environment for the patient by removing any hazardous materials from the room or surroundings. The nurse should then engage with the patient calmly and ensure the patient rests adequately between activities by ensuring the patient feels safe.
I would recommend this article to all practicing nurses as it offers an alternative to the conventional and highly practiced ways of managing people with mental challenges. The authors prove that when empowered and motivated to develop resilience, persons with mental illnesses can integrate into society and function naturally. Through the theory of Self Determination, Perlman et al. (2018) demonstrate to inform readers on previously unknown perspectives regarding mental illness management. By their work, the authors could potentially end the prejudice that defines persons with mental illness.