Damaging dichotomies and confounding contradictions in mental health inpatient nursing: lessons learned from Orwell’s 1984

Purpose This discursive paper considers the use of restrictive practices in mental health inpatient settings and how these are often prioritised over relational approaches, especially where the diagnostic label of personality disorder intersects with risk. Design/methodology/approach Key concepts from Orwell’s 1984 are studied for their pertinence to mental health inpatient settings, supporting our argument that restrictive practices arise from dichotomous thinking and externalised fears. Findings Drawing upon Orwellian themes of power, social control and digital surveillance from 1984 , the authors highlight the role of fear in perpetuating restrictive practices under a guise of benevolent care in mental health inpatient settings, especially for those who are diagnosed with a personality disorder. A lack of preparedness to work with complexity in such environments, coupled with a deficit in self-reflexivity and critical thinking, can exacerbate challenges. Research limitations/implications To transcend damaging dichotomies and reduce restrictive practices in inpatient settings, the authors make the argument for the adequate preparation and education of the mental health nurse and authentic, collaborative, user-involved care. Originality/value The authors use Orwell’s novel to support a critical discourse around those damaging dichotomies and inherent contradictions that contribute to restrictive practice in contemporary mental health settings and to question whose interests’ these restrictive practices serve.