Facing the paradox of professionalizing peer roles in MH services: How addressing self-disclosure with self-determination theory might help

4Citations
Citations of this article
12Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Peer Support Workers (PSWs) play a crucial role in recovery-oriented mental health services. They offer support and hope by sharing their personal experiences and recovery journeys. However, transitioning from voluntary self-help roles to paid positions within statutory systems is not merely a technical shift. This change creates inherent tensions and conflicts, stemming from the integration of a peer model within a medical framework. I refer to the interface between these models as the "Professional-Peer Paradox" (PPP). At its heart, this paradox questions whether and how PSWs can integrate a role that relies on self-disclosure of shared lived experiences within a system rooted in professional knowledge norms delivered unidirectionally to service recipients. Using a whole organizational approach, I propose leveraging the autonomy-supportive environment concept from self-determination theory (SDT; Deci & Ryan, 2000) to promote self-disclosure in mental health services. I highlight the complexities involved in Peer Support Workers' (PSWs) use of self-disclosure (lived experience) within statutory mental health (MH) services. I suggest that PSWs can better commit to their unique roles by structuring multiple peer roles with varying levels of self-disclosure and creating a culture that fosters peer practice. Overall, applying a SDT systems' framework to the practice of self-disclosure can enhance the occupational identity of PSWs, establishing their unique position within the spectrum of mental health professions globally.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Moran, G. S. (2025, January 13). Facing the paradox of professionalizing peer roles in MH services: How addressing self-disclosure with self-determination theory might help. Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2045796024000751

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free