Towards a Socioecological Framework to Support Mental Health Caregivers: Implications for Social Work Practice and Education
Référence bibliographique 
Ahmed, Rana, Bruce, Sheryl et Jurcik, Tomas. 2018. «Towards a Socioecological Framework to Support Mental Health Caregivers: Implications for Social Work Practice and Education ». Social Work in Mental Health, vol. 16, no 1, p. 105-122.
Intentions : «The current discussion article highlights several practice frameworks that target different levels of the socioecological framework to inform social work practice with mental health caregivers.» (p. 107)
Échantillon/Matériau : Données documentaires diverses
Type de traitement des données : Analyse théorique
«[T]he present framework emphasizes social work interventions within the […] microsystem by integrating attachment theory to enhance caregiver-care recipient relationship and positive help seeking patterns, and a strengths-based approach that emphasizes working with the family to mobilize capabilities and resilience; […] mesosystem by emphasizing community-based interventions, promoting the caregiver’s network development and empowerment within a local community; […] exosystem by understanding the role of local policies and research priorities that calls for inclusion of caregiver’s needs within the mental healthcare system; and lastly […] macrosystem by exploring the role of ideology in shaping mental health caregiving discourse.» (p. 107) «The [developed] socioecological framework is germane to social workers’ efforts to acknowledge and support the needs of mental health caregivers. The model provides a practice framework for social workers regarding strategies and competencies to engage mental health caregivers as mutual partners in the recovery process. In addition, the framework can be useful to generate solutions that extend beyond the [family] caregiver alone, but also target the social environment that the caregiver is embedded in. A central tenet of the framework is that it assumes that the different subsystems are in constant flux and in interaction with each other, allowing for top-down (government policies) as well as bottom-up influences (grass-root movements that influence policy or new forms of intervention).» (p. 117)