PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 23, 2026Journal of Forensic Practice0 citations

Tug of war: service users’ experience of care and treatment planning in a forensic mental health service using Foucauldian discourse analysis

View Full Paper
HWHannah Olivia Hart WaiteJWJulia WaneCLCarolien Lamers

Key Points

  • The research aims to explore service users' experiences of care within a Forensic Mental Health Service using Foucauldian discourse analysis.
  • Foucauldian discourse analysis was conducted on interview transcripts from seven service users in an FMHS.
  • Interviews investigated participants' perceptions and discourses around receiving care.
  • Key Foucauldian concepts such as knowledge, power, and surveillance were examined.
  • Three main discourses and two alternative discourses were identified.
  • Participants expressed a sense of powerlessness in relation to the FMHS power dynamics.
  • Knowledge about systemic factors affecting power distribution was shared by participants.

Abstract

Purpose With the recent drive for services providing care for people with offending backgrounds to adopt a more psychologically informed approach, it is integral to understand how receiving care and treatment is talked about. People’s care when detained within a Welsh Forensic Mental Health Service (FMHS) is restricted by the Mental Health Act (MHA, 1983) and managed with a care and treatment plan approach under the Mental Health Measure (NHS Wales, 2010). This study aims to explore people’s experiences of receiving care within an FMHS. Design/methodology/approach Foucauldian discourse analysis (FDA) was used to analyse interview transcripts from seven people who were receiving care within an FMHS. The interviews explored discourses of receiving care within an FMHS. Particular attention was paid to the Foucauldian concepts of knowledge, power, objectification, subjectification and surveillance. Findings Three main discourses and two alternative discourses emerged. Participants perceived the power to be held within FMHS and spoke of being in a constant battle of trying to hold onto power within a system that holds power. Knowledge about the systemic factors that influence the distribution of power was shared and participants reflected on the differences between the “internal” world of FMHS and the “outside” world. Participants’ experiences were shared through a lens of perceived powerlessness. Practical implications Overall, the people receiving care should be acknowledged as experts of their own experience, with their knowledge shared, listened to and respected. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is believed to be the first paper exploring people’s experiences of care within an FMHS from an FDA perspective.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Waite et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69e9b89b85696592c86ebb48https://doi.org/10.1108/jfp-09-2025-0088
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper