Skip to main content
MMedVellum
MCQsExamsAtlas
DashboardPricing
MMedVellum

The exam atlas that feels like a flagship product — evidence-graded topics and exam tools for MBBS and fellowship preparation. Built to scale to fifty specialties. Educational content only — not medical advice.

llms.txt·psychiatry LLM catalog · sitemap

Atlas

  • Specialty atlas
  • MBBS / Core medicine
  • Dermatology
  • ICU Fellowship (CICM)
  • Anaesthesia
  • Emergency Medicine
  • Psychiatry Fellowship

Study & account

  • MCQ practice
  • Practice alias
  • Exam tools
  • Dashboard
  • Pricing
  • Sign in

© 2026 MedVellum. For education only — not a substitute for clinical judgement.

Clinical Atlas Prestige · Evidence-first

Psych MEQs / SAQsProfessional — stigma, recovery and rights-based care

Psych MEQs / SAQs · Professional — stigma, recovery and rights-based care

Stigma, recovery and rights-based care (MEQ)

FRANZCP-style MEQ integrating stigma mapping, CHIME recovery planning, SDM for LAI vs oral, rights-based principles, and landmark evidence anchors.

20 marks20 min
On this page & tools

Target exams

FRANZCPMRCPsychABPNMD-DNB

Target exams

FRANZCPMRCPsychABPNMD-DNB
Prompt
You are a psychiatry registrar. A 25-year-old with first-episode psychosis delayed presentation for 9 months due to shame. His parents conceal the diagnosis from relatives. He declines a long-acting injectable because he does not want to 'look like a mental patient' at his apprenticeship, despite partial adherence to oral medication. He says people with his diagnosis never work. The ward culture uses labels such as 'non-compliant' in the notes. (i) Map public, self, structural and courtesy stigma in this case. (ii) Outline a personal recovery plan using CHIME. (iii) Describe how you would use shared decision-making for oral versus LAI medication. (iv) State two rights-based principles relevant if compulsory treatment is later considered, without inventing statute numbers. (v) Name two evidence anchors for anti-stigma or recovery practice. (20 marks)

Model answer

Reveal model answer

(i) Stigma map. Public: anticipated workplace and social rejection ("look like a mental patient"). Self: internalised stereotype that people with psychosis never work — classic "why try" language. Structural: pejorative ward documentation ("non-compliant") that can travel across systems; potential employment disclosure risks. Courtesy: parental concealment from relatives, reflecting associative stigma and shame.[1][2]

(ii) CHIME plan. Connectedness: rebuild apprenticeship peers and supportive family contact without forced disclosure. Hope: explicit belief that return to trade is possible with support. Identity: "apprentice with a treatable illness" rather than identity fusion with diagnosis. Meaning: valued work role and skill development. Empowerment: choice about medication formulation, disclosure timing, and goals. Address self-stigma therapeutically; involve peer support if available.[2][3]

(iii) SDM oral vs LAI. Use three-talk: team talk — partnership, goal of keeping apprenticeship and reducing relapse. Option talk — compare oral adherence demands vs LAI convenience, side-effects, injection visibility concerns, monitoring. Correct myths without coercion. Decision talk — elicit preference; if he chooses oral, agree adherence supports and review plan; document values and options. SDM is process, not a form.[4]

(iv) Rights-based principles (no invented sections). If compulsory care is later considered under local law: least restrictive option consistent with safety; dignity and explanation of rights; support for decision-making where possible; regular review; document reasoning. CRPD themes (dignity, non-discrimination, legal capacity support) inform practice but do not replace jurisdiction-specific statutes — do not claim universal abolition of all involuntary treatment as a single settled fact.[5]

(v) Evidence anchors. Examples: Corrigan/Watson stigma models and self-stigma stages; Leamy CHIME; Elwyn three-talk SDM; Thornicroft Lancet anti-stigma intervention synthesis (contact-favouring); Szmukler on MH law and CRPD interface.[1][3][4][5][6]

Common errors

Collapsing all stigma into "non-compliance"; equating personal recovery with premature discharge; using biogenetic slogans that increase social distance; inventing mental health act section numbers; treating SDM as a signature; ignoring family courtesy stigma; claiming CRPD has one universal legal outcome for all compulsory care.[1][5][6]

References

  1. [1]Corrigan PW, Watson AC Understanding the impact of stigma on people with mental illness World Psychiatry, 2002.PMID 16946807
  2. [2]Corrigan PW, Rao D On the self-stigma of mental illness: stages, disclosure, and strategies for change Can J Psychiatry, 2012.PMID 22854028
  3. [3]Leamy M, Bird V, Le Boutillier C, et al. Conceptual framework for personal recovery in mental health: systematic review and narrative synthesis Br J Psychiatry, 2011.PMID 22130746
  4. [4]Elwyn G, Frosch D, Thomson R, et al. Shared decision making: a model for clinical practice J Gen Intern Med, 2012.PMID 22618581
  5. [5]Szmukler G, Daw R, Callard F Mental health law and the UN Convention on the rights of Persons with Disabilities Int J Law Psychiatry, 2014.PMID 24280316
  6. [6]Thornicroft G, Mehta N, Clement S, et al. Evidence for effective interventions to reduce mental-health-related stigma and discrimination Lancet, 2016.PMID 26410341