Shortly after the Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal article was published (in which I first used the word Procovery), I was asked to give a keynote speech and lead a workshop on the concept of Procovery at the NYAPRS annual conference in New York. As I previously mentioned, there was no Procovery concept. It was simply a word created out of necessity, to assist in conveying a much larger point. But, I was intrigued by the idea of a broader scope and put some thought into whether or not a concept, based on a word I made up, was even possible. I ended up investing a large amount of time into the development of an initial overview of a concept that aligned with the word, and was surprised by how big it was becoming. It was like opening a door to a room no one knew existed and then no one is sure how it was missed for so long.
After the conference, I had the privilege of being invited to join the Wisconsin Blue Ribbon Commission on Mental Health and was subsequently asked by Sinikka McCabe (now Santala), the Director of the Bureau of Mental Health at the time, to write an article on the Concept of Recovery for the Final Report of the Blue Ribbon Commission on Mental Health. Below are a couple of excerpts from that Final Report from April 1997.
3. The focus of a recovery-oriented mental health system makes financial and therapeutic sense
How can we possibly afford to offer the resources necessary for individuals with a chronic illness to recover? In truth, at a time when cost control is critical, how can we not? Recovery is an everybody wins scenario. In a recovery-oriented system, mental health consumers rebuild meaningful lives while decreasing their dependence on the system. From both a therapeutic standpoint as well as an economic standpoint there should be little confusion in this regard. Rather than creating long term users of a system that fosters dependence, individuals will receive services that will enable them to recover and decrease their dependence on the system.
Recovery must not be used as a buzz word for cutting critical services. Such cutting will only increase the long term usage and and costs of the mental health system. Rather, it must be recognized that (1) as with chronic physical health issues, treatment requires the availability of an effective complement of “medical” and “rehabilitative” services and (2) all services must be delivered in a new manner with a focus on the basic principles of recovery.
In essence, the elements critical to bringing about recovery on a large scale are not costly or complex. Teilhard de Chardin said, “The focus is not to do remarkable things but to do ordinary things with the conviction of their immense importance. ” Mental health consumers want what everybody else wants. They want a home and loved ones, and to continue to grow as they age. They want their lives to have meaning. They do not want to die, never having lived.
A recovery-oriented mental health system moves beyond the focus of surviving and develops the focus on thriving. A mental health system must adopt a recovery-oriented delivery of services. It cannot afford to do otherwise, therapeutically, economically or societally.
As a reminder, these pieces of writing are from twenty-one years ago, yet still apply today.
Check back for the continued overview* of the evolution of Procovery. Next up, The Wisconsin Days – Part Three!