Background: Recovery from mental illness and mental health problems is relatively well-researched among adults, but evidence that focuses on the recovery experiences of young people and what characterizes it is scarce. With this in mind, this article aims to map out the existing research in order to identify prevailing knowledge about the recovery of young people between the ages of 12 and 25. Method: Drawing on scoping review methodology, this article is based on an analysis of 33 articles conducted in the USA, Australia, and Eur-ope. Results: Our findings reveal that young people express both similar and divergent lines of reasoning about recovery compared with adults. Our findings also indicate that young people often fluctuate in the way they view recovery, and that they thus tend to be ambivalent about what recovery means. Parents usually high-light the importance of professionals facilitating recovery, while care staff problematize the organizational frameworks available as aggravating circumstances for implementing personal recovery. Young people, parents, and care staff consistently describe recovery as a way to, despite lingering problems, enable a satisfying life. Conclusions: Through this review, we outline the need for a more distinct focus on agency and participation in young people’s recovery processes, at the same time as family involvement needs to be further investigated and operationalized.

Background: The implementation of Patient-Initiated Brief Admission (PIBA) in child and adolescent psychiatry (CAP) in Sweden is ongoing. This intervention enables adolescents between the ages of 13–17 and with complex mental health problems to initiate a short care period for relief and support rather than the care apparatus being controlling in this process. Offering it is likely to promote epistemic agency, an exchange of knowledge and recovery from mental health problems.

Aim: The aim of this study was to explore staff’s perspectives of PIBA for adolescents with complex mental health problems, and what facilitates or hinders its implementation.

Methods: Twenty seven employees, 21 women and six men, with various professions in CAP were interviewed and the material was analyzed thematically.

Results: Two overall themes emerged: “Staff’s Experiences of PIBA” and “Managing Clinical PIBA Work.” The results were discussed in relation to the theoretical frameworks of epistemic injustice and Normalization Process Theory (NPT). The main findings indicate that PIBA was generally viewed in a positive way, but that obstacles arose when it was actually put into practice. Findings also point at an overall lack of agency among staff when implementing this new way of working, at the same time as the need to adapt PIBA from an adult psychiatric intervention to one for adolescents in CAP is addressed.

Conclusion: This article offers insights into the views of psychiatric staff regarding the implementation of PIBA. If staff wish to support epistemic agency and recovery among adolescents, their agency may be an important aspect in the continued implementation. Furthermore, in order for PIBA to become normalized in a sustainable way, we suggest that the continued implementation should be characterized by a youth-friendly framework.

This study explores staff balancing parental involvement when performing recovery-oriented work via Patient-Initiated Brief Admission (PIBA) for adolescents. Data from focus group interviews with employees in Swedish Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (CAP) is discussed and analyzed using ecological systems theory. Findings suggest dualistic views on participation and parental involvement, where safety and security have to be considered supporting adolescents’ participation in psychiatric inpatient care. Staff has the potential to involve parents during PIBA without automatically diminishing adolescents’ participation, and this has to be legitimized if PIBA is to become an integrated tool to promote recovery-oriented care in CAP.

Enrollment in psychiatric inpatient care represents a pivotal moment in a young person’s life, one that often reverberates through the entire family. This study seeks to illuminate how adolescents and parents navigate youth participation during Patient-Initiated Brief Admission enrollment, shedding light on how such involvement fosters recovery from mental health problems. Drawing on interviews with five adolescents and five parents, the study unpacks the intricate dynamics of participation, with thematic analysis revealing the underlying patterns and complexities. To deepen the understanding, theoretical frameworks of epistemic injustice and ecological systems theory are employed, offering rich perspectives on the interplay of knowledge, power, and the parental role in shaping participatory experiences. The findings reveal that participation is not a static concept but a relational process, rooted in trust and profoundly influenced by adolescents’ ability to articulate their care needs. This capacity emerges as a cornerstone for enhancing meaningful participation and promoting recovery. Moreover, including parents in the enrollment process provides a dual vantage point – highlighting both the benefits and the challenges of inpatient care – while simultaneously enriching the participatory experience. The study underscores that youth participation in inpatient care is inherently dynamic, evolving through relationships with adults and fluctuating in intensity and frequency. Recognizing adolescents as emerging adults, capable of increasing autonomy despite health challenges, is essential to fostering equitable and empowering care. This perspective, crucial during inpatient enrollment, serves as a safeguard against epistemic injustice, ensuring that participation remains a pathway to recovery rather than a barrier.