Table 1 Summary of long stay stances
Theme | Long stay stance | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Dynamic acceptance (14 participants) | Static acceptance (12 participants) | Dynamic resistance (nine participants) | Static resistance (five participants) | |
Outlook | Positive outlook towards being in secure care; believed their mental health had improved whilst in secure care | Positive outlook towards being in secure care; believed their mental health had improved whilst in secure care | Negative outlook towards being in secure care; feeling bored, restricted and frustrated | Negative outlook towards being in secure care; feeling bored, suffocated and a sense of pointlessness |
Approach | Proactive approach; stressed the importance of keeping busy and making the most of their time by engaging in occupational activities and therapies | Proactive approach to occupational activities; less willing to take part in therapies that they found ineffective | Proactive approach to engaging in occupational activities and therapies that, although thought repetitive and pointless, would ultimately help them to move on | Passive approach to daily life; choosing not to engage in any occupational activities or therapies |
Attribution (for their long stay) | Being unwell; their own behaviour | Their own behaviour; being on the wrong medication; being in a non-therapeutic environment | Risk-averse factors that left them feeling unable to prove themselves to staff | Interpersonal and structural factors outside their control |
Readiness for change | Believed that they did not need to be in secure care; felt ready to move on to lower secure units | Believed that they were not ready to move on from their current unit | Believed that they did not need to be in their current unit but were stuck | Believed that they did not need to be in secure care but that they had no choice and so chose to remain |