Families living with psychosis:a comparison of British white and Afro-Caribbean relatives

Abstract

The aim of this thesis was to examine how British White and Afro-Caribbean relatives of service users with psychosis cope specifically with this illness. This was explored in two studies both set in North Birmingham. The first study examined families living with psychosis. 13 British White relatives and 5 Afro-Caribbean relatives were interviewed. The areas of interest were coping strategy use and sources of information and support. This stemmed from the literature on Lazarus and Folkman’s coping theory (1984), the impact of mental illness on the family, and coping resource differences between the two ethnic groups. Grounded Theory Analysis (Strauss and Corbin, 1990) resulted in the formation of 11 categories with differences between the two ethnic groups on ‘coping strategies’ and ‘relative’s role’. The Afro-Caribbean relatives were less likely then the British White relatives to use emotion-focused coping strategies and were less likely to become involved in the service provision for the service user. There were no other ethnic differences. The second study examined the use of a range of coping strategies specific to coping with psychosis, the overall coping style and knowledge of the service user’s illness. 21 British White relatives and 18 Afro-Caribbean relatives participated. A questionnaire examining coping strategies and an interview schedule examining illness knowledge were used. Mann Whitney U tests did not reveal any significant differences between the two ethnic groups for coping strategy use or the overall coping style use. Mann Whitney U tests revealed that the Afro-Caribbean relatives has less knowledge about the service user’s illness compared to the British White relatives with significant differences on the diagnosis and medication subsections. Multiple regression analysis revealed that a problem-focused coping style was a significant predictor of illness knowledge. Interpretations of the results from both studies are discussed. Interpretations of the results were limited due to uncontrolled factors such as sample size, length of the service user’s illness, the well-being of the service user (stable versus relapse) and the sources of participant recruitment.