Abstract
One point that emerges from qualitative research on religion and bipolar disorder (BD) is the problem patients with BD experience in distinguishing between genuine religious experiences and hyper-religiosity. However, clinical practice does not obviously address communication about differences in explanatory models for illness experiences. The aim of the current study is first to estimate the frequencies of different types of explanations (medical versus religious) for experiences perceived as religious and related to BD, second to explore how these types relate to diagnosis and religiousness, and third to explore the frequency of expectation of treatment for religiosity. In total, 196 adult patients at a specialist outpatient center for BD in the Netherlands completed a questionnaire consisting of seven types of explanations for religious experiences and several items on religiousness. Of the participants who had had religious experiences (66%), 46% viewed the experiences as ‘part of spiritual development’ and 42% as ‘both spiritual and pathological,’ 31% reported ‘keeping distance from such experiences,’ and 15% viewed them as ‘only pathological.’ Measures of religiousness were positively associated with ‘part of spiritual development’ and negatively associated with ‘keeping distance from the experiences’ and ‘only pathological.’ Half of the sample viewed religiosity as an important topic in treatment. It can be hypothesized that strength of religiousness may help people to integrate destabilizing experiences related to BD into their spiritual development. However, the ambiguity of strong religious involvement in BD necessitates careful exploration of the subject in clinical practice.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
; Braam, Arjan W 2 ; Renes, Joannes W 3 ; Muthert Hanneke J K 4 ; Zock, Hetty T 4 1 Altrecht Expertisegroep Zingeving, Zeist, The Netherlands; University of Groningen, Faculty of Theology and Religious Studies, Groningen, The Netherlands (GRID:grid.4830.f) (ISNI:0000 0004 0407 1981)
2 University of Humanistic Studies, Utrecht, The Netherlands (GRID:grid.449771.8) (ISNI:0000 0004 0545 9398); Altrecht Mental Health Care, Department of Acute Psychiatry and Department of Residency Training, Utrecht, The Netherlands (GRID:grid.413664.2)
3 Altrecht Bipolair, Altrecht Mental Health Care, Utrecht, The Netherlands (GRID:grid.413664.2)
4 University of Groningen, Faculty of Theology and Religious Studies, Groningen, The Netherlands (GRID:grid.4830.f) (ISNI:0000 0004 0407 1981)





