Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
To cite this article: J.D. Jacob & D. Holmes (2011) The culture of fear: expanding the concept
of risk in forensic psychiatric nursing, International Journal of Culture and Mental Health, 4:2,
106-115, DOI: 10.1080/17542863.2010.519123
The purpose of this article is to present, in part, the results of a nursing research
that aimed at describing how fear influences nurse-patient interactions in a
forensic psychiatric setting. Guided by an inductive research design (grounded
Downloaded by [175.45.189.138] at 00:55 25 September 2015
theory), the analysis of data revealed that nurses incorporate a risk discourse into
their practice. As a result, our data show that cultural narratives of risk affect the
experience of nursing care and nurses day-to-day management of potential
threats embodied by the patients. Furthermore, we assert that risk management is
enmeshed in a cultural script that justifies the deployment of precautionary
actions.
Keywords: culture; fear; forensic psychiatry; nursing; risk
Introduction
Currently, the use of the term risk has become increasingly prevalent in the
healthcare literature (OByrne, 2008). While publications on this topic proliferate,
other concepts upon which it relies, such as fear, remain relatively unexplored and
undertheorized (Furedi, 2006). In effect, despite the expanding literature on risk, the
concept of fear remains relatively invisible and exists only in an underdeveloped form
(Furedi, 2006). Such an observation represents a theoretical gap as the concept of
risk has no objective meaning by itself; everything depends on the shared values of
the threatened group. They are what gives the risk its effective existence (Ewald,
1993, p. 225). Choosing whether something or someone is at risk (or not) is a process
defined by the internalization of a perceived threat at the individual and collective
levels. Therefore, risk cannot be explored without investigating its threatening
origins. Fear then becomes an important sociological concept that needs to be
explored in relation to the concept of risk.
According to Furedi (2006), fear is situational and is to some extent the product
of social construction. It is constituted through the agency of the self in interaction
with others. It is also internalized through a cultural script that instructs people as to
how to respond to threats to their security (Furedi, 2006, p. 20). That is, the
conversion of a response to specific circumstances is mediated through cultural
norms that inform people about what is expected of them when confronted with a
threat and how they should respond and feel (p. 20). As a cultural artefact,
responses to perceived threats are, therefore, enmeshed in a specific set of values and
beliefs that are often shared within a group and enacted through specific procedures
and practices (Schein, 2004). At the individual level, the fearful experience remains
the product of perceptions and appraisals, which varies from one person to another
(Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). However, what should be feared and how the feared
object should be dealt with is also part of a cultural construct that gives meaning to
the notion of risk and the rationalization supporting ritualized risk-aversive practices
in specific settings.
In psychiatry (including forensic psychiatry) the study and understanding of fear
has largely been overthrown by the practice of assessing and managing risk (Castel,
1991). That is, fear has been described as an unspoken topic in the field despite
significant professional socialization to the risks of violence (and its avoidance)
embodied by forensic psychiatric patients (Holmes & Federman, 2003; Mason, 2002;
Morrison, 1990). As recent research demonstrates, working under threat compels
nurses to redefine their interactions and choice of interventions with patients (Arnetz
& Arnetz, 2001; Duxbury & Whittington, 2005; Foster, Bowers, & Nijman, 2007;
Downloaded by [175.45.189.138] at 00:55 25 September 2015
Kindy, Petersen, & Pakhurst, 2005; Morrison, 1990; Needham, 2006). Because of the
perceived risk of violence that patients embody, the need for self-preservation on the
part of nurses becomes a perceptible variable that influences nurse-patient interac-
tions (Arnetz & Arnetz, 2001; Duxbury & Whittington, 2005; Foster, Bowers, &
Nijman, 2007; Kindy, Petersen, & Pakhurst, 2005; Morrison, 1990; Needham, 2006;
Whittington & Balsamo, 1998). The negative effects of fear (one of the most reported
effects of violence) on patient care have been described by various authors (Farrell,
Bobrowski, & Bobrowski, 2006; Foster, Bowers, & Nijman, 2007; Hellzen
et al., 2004; Holmes, Perron, & OByrne, 2006; Kindy, Petersen, & Pakhurst, 2005;
Needham, 2006). The apprehension about being victimized may lead fearful
healthcare staff to adopt more controlling and less responsive services (Foster,
Bowers, & Nijman, 2007), to dissociate themselves from patients (Farrell, Bobrowski,
& Bobrowski, 2006; Hellzen et al., 2004; Holmes, Perron, & OByrne, 2006; Kindy,
Petersen, & Pakhurst, 2005) and to become passive carers. Other authors have
suggested that further investigation should be conducted on the dark side of care,
when those who pose a risk to the staffs integrity are more likely to be treated with
less trust and less commitment, or neglected altogether (Hellzen et al., 2004). In this
case, fear as a principal emotion in response to a perceived threat plays an important
role that considerably affects how nurses view patients and interact with them
(Farrell, Bobrowski, & Bobrowski, 2006; Hellzen et al., 2004; Holmes, Perron, &
OByrne, 2006; Kindy, Petersen, & Pakhurst, 2005). Under cultural discourses of
risk, a better understanding of fear in the forensic nursing domain could provide a
supplementary tool to understand nurse-patient interactions in this setting. More
importantly, recognizing how at risk individuals are managed will, hopefully, help
us develop ethically sound forensic nursing practice.
Consequently, the overall objective of this article is to present, in part, the results
of a nursing research that aimed at describing how fear influences nurse-patient
interactions in a Canadian forensic psychiatric setting. For the purpose of this paper,
we will concentrate on the researchs emergent concept of Fear, as it constitutes the
main object of analysis in relation to the concept of risk. By exploring this
association, we hope to explore the effects associated with the incorporation of a risk
discourse on nursing practice.
108 J.D. Jacob and D. Holmes
Research methodology
Given the state of the literature on the subject of fear in forensic psychiatry,
a qualitative methodology enabling a descriptive and comprehensive analysis was
required. Data analysis followed the basic principles of grounded theory (Strauss
& Corbin, 1998) as adapted and displayed in a sequential fashion by Paille (1994)
(codification, categorization, integration, conceptualization and theorization). As
such, the data collection and data analysis were conducted simultaneously (constant
comparison) in order to build a theory that remained empirically grounded in the
participants narratives.
used as the primary source of data for analysis. Direct observation, mute evidence
(institutional documents), memos and a field work journal were also used to help
grasp the complexity of fearful representations in this particular setting. In keeping
with grounded theorys inductive principles, participants continued to be recruited
for the study as long as new data emerged from each of the interviews. This process,
which included the codification of interviews and gradual categorization and
integration of emergent concepts, produced four mutually exclusive categories:
(1) Context, (2) Nursing Care, (3) Fear and (4) Othering. For this paper, we will
concentrate on the third category, Fear, as it constitutes the main object of analysis
in relation to. As such, we will explore how forensic psychiatric nurses incorporate
the risk discourse into their practice, expand on the effects of this integration on their
perception of safety and, finally, describe the strategies developed by nurses to avoid
victimization.
(Goffman, 1990). However, even with the best intentions (therapeutic rationale), the
total institution will not substitute its own culture with each individuals presenting
culture. The total institution suppresses previously consolidated external identity and
imposes its own internal frame of reference. Therefore, previously defined social
representations of the self are stripped upon entrance into the total institution and
are replaced by this internal culture. As the research results suggest, once nurses enter
forensic psychiatric environments, they are immersed in a culture of risk (Holmes,
2001, 2005; Homes & Federman, 2003; Mason, 2002; Perron, 2008). Over time,
nurses developed a new clinical scheme of reference that is rooted in suspicion and a
subsequent heightened sense of awareness. This new clinical scheme of reference
essentially accounts for a distancing from original conceptions of nursing care
(domestic culture) to a scheme of reference that is coloured with safety and security
rationales. Nurses are constantly reminded of the risks involved in working with
mentally-ill offenders. As such, nurses assimilate a culture of risk and incorporate
Downloaded by [175.45.189.138] at 00:55 25 September 2015
this notion into their practice. The following quotes attest of this incorporation:
This is a forensic unit. There is a potential situation going on here that you need to be
aware of. . . . When I talk to student I always try to take just a few minutes and make
them keenly aware of what can happen when you let your guard down . . . when you stop
being diligent . . . (Informant 5)
Being nave can get you a long way. However, there only needs to be one bad incident . . .
I know one woman who worked here for years without a single major incident, and then
she was not paying attention to her patient downtown, and he assaulted a little
girl. . . . and this lady was extremely nave. . . . it was not a problem for her for twenty
years, but there is that one incident and that is all it takes. (Informant 6)
. . . and you know, we have got a pellet gun brought onto the ward by a really offender
kind of guy and held someone hostage. There have been very serious things over the
years. (Informant 15)
or experienced these events may not feel the need for the same guarded approach
to patients:
Maybe it is because I am new and I have not had an awful lot of experience in this field.
Not to put myself down but . . . I have seen a lot, but at the same time I have not seen a
lot. So maybe because I have not seen as much as I will see over the years to
come . . . maybe that is why . . . like, do not get me wrong . . . I always have my guard up.
But I guess . . . there are other people that have their guards up more than what I do, and
I am just not there yet. So . . . like I said, maybe it is because I am new . . . there is more to
come for me to see. That maybe I will . . . have my guard up even more than what I do
now. (Informant 14)
rigid frameworks that they evoke force individuals (both patients and staff) to
re-interpret the meaning of social interactions (Chauvenet, Rostaing, & Orlic, 2008).
Over time, representations of the patient (or prisoner) become polarized and the
secure structure then becomes an environment where discourses of danger are
omnipresent (Chauvenet, Rostaing, & Orlic, 2008). Much like the results of this
study, it is these polarized discourses of danger that come to limit therapeutic
opportunities:
I think it causes conflict internally within peoples minds, and differing opinions in
terms of approaches to treatment plans and things. I think the conflict inside is that you
can become a little preoccupied with the security and the legalistic aspects of it. And
that has an impact on the care and treatment you can provide as well. So reconciling
those two is difficult. (Informant 3)
Except for in the seclusion room, [cameras] were the biggest mistake they ever made on
forensics, because it took nurses out of the ward and into a bubble. And over here, the
nurses are still in the bubble. So at any given time, you can walk up to the office, and
there is usually three or four people sitting there. . . . cameras did not tell you what was
going on in the rooms. . . . You could not tell a mental status looking through a
camera. . . . Cameras, I think they really allow people to not use their skills in
observation and assessment. (Informant 2)
However, the removal of surveillance technologies roughly fifteen years after their
introduction produced feelings of division, exclusion and (in)visibility by partici-
pants. As a result, the location of nurses on the wards was always defined in relation
to others (both patients and staff) and was qualified in terms of relative safety. Not
being visible on the units affected both the functioning of the units and the general
perception of safety:
Downloaded by [175.45.189.138] at 00:55 25 September 2015
I felt safer on our old unit. . . . Because of the monitoring that we were able to do. The
camera system that we had in place. . . . You could see so much more, and you were
aware of what was going on. . . . You knew that when you are in the main hallway, staff
could see you. You knew that if you went into one of the patients dorms, or even went
into the bathroom, staff saw you going in there. They knew where you were on the ward
at all times. (Informant 7)
Plus not having the monitors, like the cameras that we can use. And you just felt that
when that was there and your own co-workers were watching, they had your back. Here,
without that, it feels like you do not know if anybody has your back or not. (Informant 1)
Now I had a hard time when I first came over there, if you are talking about
fear. . . . because, in forensics if you were getting rushed by seven or eight people, you are
Downloaded by [175.45.189.138] at 00:55 25 September 2015
in serious trouble. . . . It took a long time for me to get down from that. So I guess that
there were a lot of things that went on that I had just kind of internalized and just did.
(Informant 5)
I think that there is more fear than the people acknowledge. I think that people become
conditioned to working in these environments. I think, especially when you get people
that are acutely ill, and you understand their history and potentials, and people say,
Well I worked there anyways . . . it does not bother me . . . I do not know if that is true.
I think there is a degree of anxiety in everyone working in these environments. I think
that that is a good thing, in that it makes them think of the safety needs of everyone
around in the environment and dealing with people that have potential. (Informant 9)
(1) Interventions directed at the self: gathering information about the patient
and/or situation and, subsequently, taking action to minimize victimization
(talking in open spaces, doing rounds two-by-two, evaluating patients from
a distance etc.).
(2) Interventions directed at the patient: forms of control that are aimed at the
patient (and his body), such as verbal de-escalation, PRN medication, using
physical force, developing a privilege system etc.
(3) Interventions directed at the environment: forms of control that seek to
rearrange the environment to avoid victimization, such as the use of cameras,
controlling what is allowed on the units, staffing etc.
International Journal of Culture and Mental Health 113
once again, enmeshed in a cultural script that justifies some precautionary actions
over others. Much like Holmes, Perron and Guimond (2007), the results from this
study would indicate that the way risk is dealt with is a process that is often
influenced by peers and the culture of the institution:
I am having a conversation with a client and he is saying, I would like the door open for
an hour. Okay, you want me to stay in here for an hour before I come out . . . well, you
are going to unlock the door . . . well, I want the door open. And well: No. I can open it
a crack, but we are not leaving the door right open; that is too much stimulation. And
then you will have somebody in the background piping, No we do not leave the doors
open under any circumstances. Well okay. I guess . . . we will have to take a different
plan. (Informant 6)
The underlying message conveyed through this research is that nurses are
encouraged to engage in a reflexive exercise regarding the restrictive measures
deployed in their work environment. Collective understandings of how at risk
individuals should be dealt with must be unearthed if we wish to develop ethically
sound forensic nursing practice. If practices that seek to create a safe environment are
not discussed openly, then nurses may develop ways of practicing that further
distance themselves from idealistic conceptions of care. The narratives that
participants shared regarding the use of preventive seclusion or even open quiet
rooms in this research attest to this contextual consideration. Nurses who evolve in
an institution become accustom to its cultural script and do not necessarily question
the possibility of other ways of doing in any given situation. More importantly,
defining the patient population as being at risk must not become an overriding
practice that justifies the deployment of any and all restrictive measures.
Final remarks
The objective of this article was to present, in part, the results of a nursing research
that aimed at describing how fear influences nurse-patient interactions in a forensic
psychiatric setting. Throughout the paper, we concentrated on the researchs
emergent concept of Fear, as it constitutes the main object of analysis in relation
to the concept of risk. By exploring the concepts of fear and risk in forensic
psychiatry, it is evident that contextual considerations (such as organizational
culture) must not be overlooked when analysing nursing interventions. As this
114 J.D. Jacob and D. Holmes
Acknowledgement
J.D. Jacob and D. Holmes involved like to thank the Social Science and Humanities Research
Council for work support.
Downloaded by [175.45.189.138] at 00:55 25 September 2015
Notes on contributors
Jean Daniel Jacob is Assistant Professor at the school of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences,
University of Ottawa. His research latest are situated with the field of psychiatry/forensic
psychiatry and include topics such as violence, risk, ethics and the sociopolitical aspects of
nursing practice.
Dave Holmes is full professor and Vice-Dean (Academic) at the University of Ottawas Faculty
of Health Sciences. He is also University Research Chairs in Forensic Nursing (20092014)
and Nurse-Researcher at the University of Ottawa, Institute of Mental Health Research
(Forensic Psychiatry Program). Most of his work, comments, essays, analyses and research are
based on the poststructuralist works of Deleuze Guattari and Michel Foucault. He is co-editor
of Critical Interventions in the Ethics of Health Care (Ashgate, 2009) and Abjectly Boundless:
Boundaries, Bodies and Health Care (Ashgate, 2010). He is also Editor-in-Chief for APORIA
The Nursing Journal.
References
Arnetz, J.E., & Arvetz, B.B. (2001). Violence towards health care staff and possible effects on
the quality of patient care. Social Science and Medicine, 52, 417427.
Bourke, J. (2006). Fear: A cultural history. London: Virago.
Castel, R. (1991). From dangerousness to risk. In G. Burchell, C. Gordon, & P. Miller (Eds.),
The Foucault effect (pp. 281298). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Chauvenet, A., Rostaing, F., & Orlic, C. (2008). La violence carcerale en question [Exploring
prison violence]. Paris: Presse Universitaire de France.
Duxbury, J., & Whittington, R. (2005). Causes and management of patient aggression and
violence: Staff and patient perspectives. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 50(5), 469478.
Ewald, F. (1993). Two infinities of risk. In B. Massumi (Ed.), The politics of everyday fear
(pp. 221228). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Farrell, G.A., Bobrowski, C., & Bobrowski, P. (2006). Scoping workplace aggression in
nursing: Findings from an Australia study. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 55(6), 778787.
Foster, C., Bowers, L., & Nijman. (2007). Aggressive behaviour on acute psychiatric wards:
Prevalence, severity and management. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 58(2), 140149.
Furedi, F. (2006). Culture of fear revisited (4th ed.). London: Continuum.
Goffman, E. ([1961] 1990). Asylums: Essays on the social situation of mental patients and other
inmates. New York: Anchor Books.
Hellzen, O., Asplund, K., Sandman, P.-O., & Norberg, A. (2004). The meaning of caring as
described by nurses caring for a person who acts provokingly: An interview study.
Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences, 18, 31.
International Journal of Culture and Mental Health 115
Holmes, D. (2001). Articulation du controle social et des soins infirmiers dans un contexte de
psychiatrie penitentiaire [Articulation of social control and nursing care in corrections].
(Unpublished doctoral dissertation) University of Montreal, Canada.
Holmes, D. (2005). Governing the captives: Forensic psychiatric nursing in corrections.
Perspectives in Psychiatric Care, 41(1), 313.
Holmes, D., & Federman, C. (2003). Constructing monsters: Correctional discourse and
nursing practice. International Journal of Psychiatric Nursing Research, 8(3), 942962.
Holmes, D., Perron, A., & OByrre, P. (2006). Understanding disgust in nursing: Abfection,
self and the other. Research and Theory for Nursing Practice: An International Journal,
20(4), 305315.
Holmes, D., Perron, A., & Guimond, P. (2007). La mise en salle disolement en milieux
psychiatriques: Critique du processus decisionnel [Secularism practition psychiatry: A
critical examination of the nurses decision making process]. Sante Mentale, 116, 1723.
Kindy, D., Petersen, S., & Parkburst, D. (2005). Perilous work: Nurses experiences in
Psychiatric units with high risks of assault. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 19(4), 169175.
Lazarus, R.S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal and coping. New York: Springer.
Mason, G. (1999). The spectacle of violence: Homophobia, gender and knowledge. London:
Downloaded by [175.45.189.138] at 00:55 25 September 2015
Routledge.
Mason, T. (2002). Forensic psychiatric nursing: A literature review and thematic analysis of
role tensions. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 9, 511520.
Morrison, E.F. (1990). The tradition of toughness: A study of non-professional nursing care in
psychiatric settings. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 22(1), 3238.
Needham, I. (2006). Psychological responses following exposure to violence. In D. Richter &
R. Whittington (Eds.), Violence in Model Health Settings (pp. 295318). New York:
Springer.
OByrne, P. (2008). The dissection of risk: A concept analysis. Nursing Inquiry, 15(1), 3039.
Perron, A. (2008). Exploration de la construction identitaire du detenu par le biais des
discours du personnel infirmier dans un milieu de psychiatrie correctionnelle [Exploring the
construction of inmates Subjectivity through nursing discourses in corrections]. (Unpub-
lished doctoral dissertation) University of Ottawa, Canada.
Schein, E.H. (2004). Organizational Culture and Leadership (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
Strauss, A.L., & Corbin, J. (1988). Basics of qualitative research, techniques and procedures for
developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Sunstein, C.R. (2005). Laws of fear: Beyond the precautionary principle. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Whittington, R., & Balsamo, D. (1998). Violence: Fear and Power. In T. Mason & D. Mercer
(Eds.), Critical perspective in forensic care: Inside out (pp. 6484). London: Macmillan.