TPC Journal-Vol 9- Issue 4-FULL ISSUE

The Professional Counselor | Volume 9, Issue 4 385 Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], WHO) that offer broad ways of understanding the term. These definitions, although useful, may not capture distinctions associated with region, socioeconomic status, or cultural group differences. Understanding how groups of people view mental health has many benefits to enhancing MHL. A more specific understanding of mental health concepts can serve as a foundation to increase the utilization of mental health services, improve the quality of care, and enhance clients’ ability to communicate concerns. If there are to be greater gains in prevention, intervention, and management of mental health in rural, southern regions of the United States, we need a comprehensive understanding of aspects that are included in perceptions of mental health—using their own words. Methods Procedures Prior to data collection, the Institutional Review Board at a Southeastern U.S. university granted approval to complete the study to explore MHL. Data were collected via a paper-and-pencil survey. Research team members approached patients waiting for a regularly scheduled medical appointment with their primary care physician to complete the survey. Paper copies were stored in a locked filing cabinet within a locked office. The family medical center was located in a rural area of a state in the Southeastern United States. The family medical center where the research took place also housed a mental health provider who received referrals from the medical doctors at the same site. The research team asked permission to collect data on-site, and the lead physician at the center agreed. The mental health provider provides services to many of the same patients who receive medical care at the office. This study was part of a larger, quantitative research investigation on mental health, mental health stigma, and MHL (Crowe et al., 2018). Because of the expansive nature of the dataset, however, this article only focuses on the qualitative components of the survey. Participants Using published guidelines for in-person recruitment, the research team approached patients as they waited in the waiting room and asked if they would be interested in joining the research study (Felsen, Shaw, Ferrante, Lacroix, & Crabtree, 2010). When participants elected to participate in the study, they completed an informed consent and survey in the waiting area or in an exam room while waiting for the medical professional. All data were collected over the course of approximately six months. Incentives were not offered to participants and all participants could choose to opt out of participation at any time. Participants included 102 individuals, including 65 females (63.7%) and 37 males (36.3%). A total of 70 participants identified as White (68.6%), 25 identified as Black/African American (24.5%), four identified as multiracial (3.9%), two did not know or endorsed the “other” category (2%), and one identified as Asian (1%). Regarding age, 30 (29%) participants were age 60 and above, 21 (21%) were between the ages of 50–59, another 21 (21%) were between the ages of 40–49, 14 (14%) were between the ages of 30–39, 14 (14%) were between the ages of 19–29, and two (2%) were 18 or younger. Fifty- six participants (55%) were married, while 27 (26%) were single. A total of 15 (15%) were separated/ divorced, and four (4%) were widowed. One hundred and twelve participants were asked to complete the survey, and102 individuals completed the materials, yielding a 91% useable response rate. Demographic information is summarized in Table 1.