Co‐Production With Mental Health Family Carers: The Value, Outcomes and Benefits for Family Carers and Academic Researchers

INTRODUCTION: Family engagement in mental health service reform, design, treatment, and research is highlighted as important within government and governance guidelines; however, inconsistencies of inclusion continue to be experienced and reported. Within mental health and community research there are calls for the adoption of participatory and co-production methodologies. OBJECTIVE: To add to the informed debate about patient and public involvement and engagement, this article explored the value, outcomes, and benefits of co-production as a way of working with and elevating mental health family carers in research. METHODS: Thirteen family carer co-researchers participated in one of two focused-conversations alongside two university academics, to reflect upon their experiences of working together across a 9-month co-produced research project. Co-researchers were asked to consider experiences in relation to the meaning of participation, impacts of co-production, and how this co-produced research compared to involvement in other research. The co-researchers were invited to participate in co-analysing the focused-conversations transcriptions, determining the findings, and authoring this paper. RESULTS: Utilising an inductive approach to reflexive thematic analysis, insights into the values and benefits for family carers, academic researchers, research evidence, and outcomes were established. Themes developed about the values and benefits as well as the mechanisms of co-production. Benefits were indicated for the researchers, participants, research process, evidence and outcomes. Mechanisms in relation to people's experiences of co-production included: processes were different to other research experiences, practices were relational, and ethos was collegial and supportive. The value of co-production was seen as privileging family carer voices, creating a sense of community and 'sitting around the kitchen table', leading to belonging and sharing within a space where people were safe, and participants felt validated. CONCLUSION: In recognising that co-production is fundamentally different to traditional research, this paper revealed the value, outcomes, and benefits of processes, practices and ethos that engaged and elevated family carer leadership in research. Family carer co-researchers experienced feelings of increased capability and identified that co-production, is right if the end result resonates with the whole experience.