An email from ResearchGate informed me that a co-authored paper:
- had been cited in
another publication. A check was rewarded. It always feels good to be able to add a study to the bibliography listing (please see the sidebar). This is an early view, by Brent Hayward in Australia:
Hayward, B.A. (2020), Mental health nursing in bushfire‐affected
communities: An autoethnographic insight.
Int J Mental Health Nurs. DOI:
10.1111/inm.12765
What stands out to me are Hayward's profession of mental health nursing within a public educational service and disaster response. I'm not sure how many times I have referred to the generic nature of Hodges' model, but this shift from reading a forensic paper to applying h2cm in disaster response is encouraging. While the immediacy of today's media brings home the catastrophic scale and tragedy of bushfires - work like this also reveals the humanistic side.
The research method of autoethnography has definite currency. Since the MRES at Lancaster, I have wondered if there is any autoethnographic merit in this blog? Hayward has clearly seen the value of the model with regard to reflection and self-reflection. Over the past few years - Brexit, climate change, the bushfires (and California) the importance and relevance of the political domain within Hodges' model continues to increase. (The content of many posts should provide evidence of this.)
It also appears that Hodges' model can draw out the distinction between intrapersonal and interpersonal relations and reflexivity. It could be argued that the humanistic-mechanistic axis also demarcates what is intrapersonal and what interpersonal. The latter standing for the (overt) skills so essential to effective mental health nurses. Hence, what are labelled the interpersonal and sociological domains. The combination of autoethnography, gestalt and use of a visual prompt for reflection is also informative and as Hayward notes could provide an avenue for the work of others. ...
"My unsuccessful attempt to locate literature about mental health nursing in bushfire-affected communities caused me to look towards nursing models more broadly. I was drawn to Doyle and Jones’ (2013) paper on the application of Hodges’ Health Career Model in forensic mental health nursing because of its deliberate consideration of political issues. This resonated with me as a public sector employee. Hodges’ model was originally developed in 1983 but has received little attention in the literature. Doyle and Jones’ paper was in response to this deficit, and in this frame, the present study continues this legacy. Hodges’ model is appealing here because of its attention to reflective practice and the theory-practice gap–two purposes which are of particular relevance in the present study." pp.2-3.
"Second is the use of a nursing theory or model to interpret findings.
Only Gardner and Lane (2010) used a model, and this was one for clinical
supervision rather than mental health nursing practice per se. Mental
health nurses who are considering autoethnographic approaches should
consider these methodological elements for both rigour and practical
purposes. This
study has also contributed the second published clinical application of
Hodges’ model and its effectiveness here suggests that further
exploration of its application would be useful." p.6.
I would like to express my sincere thanks to Brent for not only
recognising the potential of Hodges' model, but actually applying it in
research* and in such a vital context.
Hopefully I can reflect more on
what is clearly for Hodges model and the concepts of health career, life chances and global health - a very significant paper.
*See also: