Recovery college dropout

Recovery colleges (RCs) are rapidly spreading across Western countries, and research indicates beneficial outcomes of this co-produced model of mental health care. Meanwhile, risks of adverse outcomes and RC dropout remain understudied. To address this research gap, we conducted qualitative interviews with 14 participants who dropped out of RC courses in Denmark. This article, adhering to the consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ), presents a typology of the main dropout drivers identified in our sample: external, relational and course-related. External drivers involve practical obstacles, for example some participants feared taking public transportation and lacked access to alternative means of travelling to the courses. Relational drivers entail distressing interactions with educators or peer students, for example some participants felt stigmatized or intimidated. Course-related drivers concern the content of the courses, for example some students considered the academic level too basic as their design did not take prior learning into account, while others experienced a sense of alienation because they were unable or unwilling to share the kind of personal experiences course assignments envisaged. In the discussion of our findings, we consider how different types of drivers call for different modes of responses. We discuss dilemmas related to the proposed responses for reducing or accepting RC dropout.