In Western countries, professionals in mental health care (“professionals”) tend to be less religious than “consumers”. This qualitative study explores the meaning of this “religiosity gap” for professionals and consumers in mental health care. Both a regular, secular and a Christian clinic in the Netherlands participated in this study. Content analysis was applied to 35 consumer interviews and 18 interviews with professionals. Consumers reported negative experiences (e.g., perceived disrespect and a lack of confidence) and/or negative expectations (e.g., misunderstanding and misinterpretation) related to a religiosity gap. They also mentioned advantages of a “religiosity match”, like safety and confidence and appreciated professionals’ religious/spiritual self-disclosure. Professionals in secular care setting tended to avoid religion and spirituality. In both clinics, they tended to neutralise religious/spiritual differences and be reticent in self-disclosure. Professionals are recommended to recognise the relevance of a religiosity gap and to consider different strategies in approaching religion/spirituality.

This study examines religious/spiritual (R/S) care needs and their possible determinants among mental health patients in the Netherlands. Patients in a Christian (CC, n = 100) and a secular (SC, n = 101) mental health clinic completed a questionnaire. Analysis revealed three factors on the R/S care needs measure: (1) “R/S conversations,” (2) “R/S program and recovery,” and (3) “R/S similar outlook on life.” The presence of R/S care needs was predicted by the following: site (CC versus SC), R/S involvement, and religious strain. Most commonly, unmet R/S care needs were explanation about R/S and illness by the practitioner, prayer with a nurse, conversations about religious distress with a nurse, conversation when R/S conflicts with treatment, help in finding a congregation, and contact between chaplain and practitioner. “R/S similar outlook on life” was equally important to patients with and without R/S involvement. Patients appreciate a match in worldview with health professionals, either religious or secular.

Introduction: In the last decades, the attention for religion/spirituality (R/S) in mental health care (MHC) has considerably increased. However, patients’ preferences concerning R/S in treatment have not often been investigated. The aim of this study was to find out how patients in clinical multidisciplinary MHC want R/S to be addressed in their care. Methods: Thirty-five semi-structured interviews were carried out between September 2015 and July 2016 among patients in a secular and a Christian MHC in the Netherlands. Qualitative inductive content analysis was performed, using Atlas Ti. Results: Patients appreciated (1) individual R/S conversations between patients and care team members (mainly nurses), (2) a familiar R/S environment, (3) a special R/S program and (4) contact with their R/S network. Patients varied in their presentation of R/S care needs from (a) explicit, mostly in the Christian MHC, to (b) implicit, predominantly in the secular MHC, or showed (c) hidden R/S care needs. A non-acute stage of the illness and R/S affinity of the mental health professionals, were classified as possible conditions for addressing R/S. Discussion and implications for practice: Nurses are recommended to be aware of the diversity of patients’ R/S care needs. Actively addressing R/S may help in recognizing implicit or even hidden R/S care needs. Further considerations on whether and how to respond to patients’ R/S care needs would be justified.

Introduction: Because of the pivotal role that family members play in caring for their suicidal relative, insight into their experiences is necessary to develop good support for them.Aim: This systematic review aimed to aggregate qualitative research examining the experiences of family members living with their suicidal relative, and their impact on daily life.Methods: Systematic searches, covering the period 2000–2022, were conducted in Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Ovid Nursing database and CINAHL. The JBI‐QARI meta‐aggregation approach and the PRISMA guidelines were followed.Results: Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria. Six themes were identified: The hard job of managing the risk of suicide; contributing to the relative's survival; struggling with professional care; being in a lonely position; pressure on relationships; and disruption of well‐being.Discussion: The constant worry of losing their relative and ever‐present vigilance dominates their lives in such a way that their well‐being may be decreased. Professionals often overlook family members, which leads to feelings of powerlessness and loneliness.Implications for Practice: Collaborating with families in treatment, allowing them to share information and supporting them in the care at home may lead to better outcomes for both the family and their suicidal relative.

Background. Religious and spiritual (R/S) struggles may impact mental health treatment and recovery processes. The current study investigates how R/S struggles play a role in mental illness and what approaches are experienced as helpful. Methods. Thirty-five semi-structured interviews with clinical mental health patients in a Christian (N = 15) and a secular (N = 20) mental health clinic were narratively analyzed. Results. R/S struggles are common in people who suffer from mental illness and often coexist together with R/S support, mostly fluctuating over time. In summary, patients experience R/S struggles as negative feelings (e.g., loneliness, shame, mistrust) and the absence of positive feelings (e.g., hope and peace). These are influenced by someone’s R/S background and beliefs, as well as by the illness and other events. All participants appreciated a receptive approach (1) and many preferred an active approach (2) by mental health professionals. Some patients reported benefits from a directive approach (3). Conclusions. R/S struggles are tightly connected with other aspects that play a role in patients with mental illness. Mental health professionals are recommended to listen to patients’ narratives and carefully consider whether or not further interventions, in order to enhance R/S support and reduce R/S struggles, might be appropriate.