Abstract
Background: Recovery from opioid addiction is unique to each individual. The overall recovery process occurs across an undefined period of time, involving both periods of change and periods without change. When an individual in recovery feels unable to make productive changes towards their recovery vison, they feel stuck or stagnant and are located at a distance from the recovery they desire. Current approaches to recovery focus on addressing defined problems and goals and working towards an overall recovery vision. This approach fits with people in recovery who have definitive problems to address; however, it is not effective for people who are stuck or stagnant when there is little insight into the reasons why they experience this. This thesis aimed to study stuckness-stagnation as an experience in and of itself. I sought to consider situations wherein the experience of stuckness-stagnation could not be attributed to a specific barrier. To gain further insight, this research focused on internal frameworks. The research question asked how internal barriers were experienced in opioid addiction recovery by people who identified as being stuck or stagnant. This aimed to develop insight into the internal constructions within this space and to interpret how people’s perceptions could influence their experiences of being stuck-stagnant.
Methodology: The research used the qualitative methodology of Constructivist Grounded Theory. This generated theory from the data collected. Data were collected by interviewing fourteen participants about their lived experiences. The data were transcribed, analysed and interpreted. Four theories were generated from the dataset, each illustrating different internal frameworks and processes of stuckness-stagnation.
Results: The results suggest that stuckness-stagnation is a set of internal processes that manipulate the recovery experience. These internal frameworks can cross the entire span of recovery and affect participants’ attempts to pursue and perceive that they can create a fulfilling recovery. This affects both the process of individuals feeling able to move towards their own goals and the felt experience of recovery itself.
Implications: This research has implications for broader understandings of opioid addiction recovery, offering different ways to interpret stuckness-stagnation. It suggests that this issue can be addressed by considering internal perspectives. By focusing on internal perspectives, it offers alternative routes to address the experience of stuckness-stagnation when concrete barriers are unable to be located or adjusted. The research suggests a way to account for experiences of stuckness that feel ambiguous to individuals by offering interpretive frameworks to be considered. Additionally, this research can be applied at the point of care for treatment providers and peer-led recovery services and by the people themselves in opioid addiction recovery. It can be used prior to individuals developing insight into their own experience as an insight development tool, connecting discrete behaviours to a larger process. Future research can focus on understanding points of intervention during the process of stuckness-stagnation or on considering internal constructs of stuckness-stagnation in different settings or for different issues.