A A A
Friday, 15 December 2017

RLC Articles

The RLC produces a newsletter each and every month that offers monthly calendars, announcements and articles. Although old newsletters are archived on the website, the articles - often on important advocacy-related issues - run the risk of being buried and difficult to find. In an attempt to make that information more accessible, we still also list RLC-published articles from the newsletter (and other relevant sources) here for your ease and perusal.

 

Asking People to Leave Their Residences During the Day

Originally published in the Western Mass RLC's Newsletter, May, 2013

 

Asking People to Leave Their Residences During the Day:

A Human Rights Violation?key

It can be deceptively easy to fall into patterns,
and do as we have done, without always taking
the time to wonder why.
 
However, in an era of mental health services where ‘person centered’ and ‘recovery-oriented’ approaches make up some of the most prominent initiatives, it’s vital to examine our day-to-day practices on a regular basis. Comparing practices against values can be challenging, as it often calls upon us to change habits, and sometimes fairly embedded organizational cultures, and invest dollars and time that might not particularly exist to be invested. One relevant issue that has arisen repeatedly over time is that of people being asked to leave their program residence during particular hours of the day.
city.alone
The question: Is it okay to ask people who are paying rent to live in a program residence to routinely leave between set times every (or any) day of the week? Is it a human rights violation?
 
The short answer: No, it is not okay. Yes, it is a violation of
someone’s basic rights to live and be in their own home.
 
But the full conversation is more complicated than that. To fully understand the question, it’s important to make an effort to understand why this practice may have come into being.

Read more: Asking People to Leave Their Residences During the Day

Writing Notes & Peer Roles: A Conflict of Interest

There has been a relative explosion of ‘peer’ roles in the last five years in Massachusetts. StackofFiles

In many organizations, peer roles came to be developed largely because contracts began to require them (though many of these same organizations were already contemplating how to make that move of their own volition, and some had already begun to do so).

While most people see this shift as positive, it comes with many inevitable ‘bumps,’ learning curves, and tensions.

One of the most present and ongoing tensions connected to the integration of peer roles has been figuring out how to make space for a role that operates in a substantively different way, while still needing to meet the basic requirements and needs of the organization within which the position is held. Issues of this sort that have arisen include those around:

  • medication administration
  • involvement in representative payeeships
  • treatment planning 
  • note taking.

We'll be focusing on the last part, the taking of notes.

In its purest form, the ‘peer’ role is intended to be based in mutuality, partnership and the concept of ‘in but not of’ the system. But what does each of these mean? In brief:

Mutuality: Mutuality does NOT necessarily mean exactly equal or identical roles, and still leaves room for some responsibilities for each person to be different. However, it does require that no one be seen as THE expert, and it assumes that the focus is on the relationship rather than one person. 

Partnership: This principle assumes that no one is taking on the ‘doing for’ or ‘fixing’ role, and that there is a sense of shared responsibility and participation that is practiced intentionally throughout the relationship. Power balance is critical.

'In But Not of': This is the trickiest but perhaps the most important of these concepts. The peer role has been developed around the concept that the job is to work in the system, but NOT be responsible to all the system’s systems. Instead, the main priority and focus is to make sure that the individual with whom they are working is supported to develop their voice and be heard. Above all else, the person in the peer role helps to create the conditions (by the language they use, the opportunities they point out, the resources they share, the questions they ask, etc.) to make that possible.

Plainly put, note taking interferes with all of these most basic values.dominoes

  • It takes away from mutuality by requiring one person to write about another.
  • It enhances power differentials that can damage the trust that is so critical to peer-to-peer support. 
  • It moves away from partnership and shared responsibility by creating a ‘reporting back’ requirement. 
  • Even attempts to ‘share’ writing notes WITH the person about whom the note is being written have most recently been foiled by new, computerized note keeping systems that are not accessible where meetings are actually taking place.
  • Finally, it clearly interferes with the ‘in but not of’ principle. Notes are most typically attached to treatment plans, and while it is within the scope of a peer-to-peer relationship to support someone to develop their voice and vision around what they’d like their treatment plan to say, it is NOT within the scope of that relationship to have the person in a peer role be responsible for writing that plan, writing corresponding notes in that plan, to be written into that plan as responsible for some element or intervention and so on.
click read more to continue reading this article here,

Read more: Writing Notes & Peer Roles: A Conflict of Interest

Forced Out During the Day

Asking People to Leave Their Residences During the Day:

A Human Rights Violation? key

It can be deceptively easy to fall into patterns,
and do as we have done, without always taking
the time to wonder why.
 
However, in an era of mental health services where ‘person centered’ and ‘recovery-oriented’ approaches make up some of the most prominent initiatives, it’s vital to examine our day-to-day practices on a regular basis. Comparing practices against values can be challenging, as it often calls upon us to change habits, and sometimes fairly embedded organizational cultures, and invest dollars and time that might not particularly exist to be invested. One relevant issue that has arisen repeatedly over time is that of people being asked to leave their program residence during particular hours of the day.
city.alone
The question: Is it okay to ask people who are paying rent to live in a program residence to routinely leave between set times every (or any) day of the week? Is it a human rights violation?
 
The short answer: No, it is not okay. Yes, it is a violation of
someone’s basic rights to live and be in their own home.
 
But the full conversation is more complicated than that. To fully understand the question, it’s important to make an effort to understand why this practice may have come into being.
 
When asked why residences are sometimes shut down during the day, the three most common answers seem to be:
  1. Because there is concern that people will retreat to their bedrooms and/or just sit around the house all day
  2. Because, although the residence is someone’s home, it is also a program, and each person signs a contract agreeing to participate in their treatment while there
  3. Because the provider does not have money to staff the residence all day long
please click "read more" to read the rest of this article,
or see pages 4 and 5 of our full newsletter, available here.
 

Read more: Forced Out During the Day

RLC TEAM E MAIL

Registration & Login for Website Users