Take your partners
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/17556228200600010 |
| Pages | 4-6 |
| Published date | 01 October 2006 |
| Date | 01 October 2006 |
| Author | Bill Davidson |
| Subject Matter | Health & social care |
4
Take your partners
Bill Davidson provides a personal perspective about
access to psychological therapies.
Asked, initially, to write about improving access to
psychological therapies, I pondered and (briefly) considered.
Ithen said ‘no’. The reason was that in my experiences of
two episodes of mental illness, one in the early 1990s and
then another in the late 1990s, if I received psychological
therapy,Ididn’t know or understand about the intervention
or treatment. Nobody told me, explained or gave me reasons
for the treatment I received. So, as I didn’t know whether I
had received ‘psychological therapy’, how could I write
about it? I doubt that it was my inability to understand and
consider,indeed I had been a head teacher for many years,
but it seemed that information and engagement were not
priorities then, within the existing system. Only a few
enlightened practitioners encouraged a ‘partnership and
participation’ approach to treatment and care, and my plea
of ‘I may be depressed, but I’m not stupid’ was a plea for
information and to be included and involved.
However,could it be that I was an innocent party to
this passive, non-inclusive approach? I made assumptions
that mental illness couldn’thappen to me; I could cope –
just give me the pills! Then I made assumptions that the
doctors, the nurses, others knew best and the system was
effective enough to meet my needs. Unfortunately,
assumptions can be misleading.
Iwas standing on a railway station very recently waiting
to catch a train to Rotherham to speak to a user group on
the ‘New Ways of Working in Mental Health’. I was dressed
formally (suit and tie) carrying a Royal College of Nursing
(RCN) conference bag and a guitar (my presentation aide).
Amature lady approached and, with an apology for her
inquisitiveness, she asked what the connection was
between the health service and a musical instrument. I
explained my present role (Service User Involvement Lead,
NIMHE National Workforce Programme) and the
presentation I was to give with a musical element.
She then said she assumed the instrument was a cello,
and was verysurprised to learn it was a guitar – ‘Oh you
don’t look as if you play a guitar!’ Obviously my apparent
dignified appearance had to imply what she considered a
conventional orchestral instrument. Her assumption was
wrong. If she’d seen me the previous day relaxing at a BBQ
she might have thought differently.
Perhaps, therefore assumptions were made that, as a
patient, I was informed, involved and empowered but like
most assumptions they can be, at least, misleading and
often wrong. I felt ‘done to’ rather than included as a
partner in my care. This is not ingratitude for the genuine
care and consideration I was shown by many at that time
but an indication of the attitude and culture engendered
by the system.
Professor Phil Barker asserts that in the process of
healing in mental health, the patient does most of the
work (Barker,1997). In my experience this is so true. But
how on earth can the long process of healing be effective
unless the user/carer is enabled. Enabled, yes, by capable,
perceptive, sensitive professionals, by appropriate
medication, but more importantly ‘self-enabled’ by being
honestly included in one’s care, given clear and
appropriate information, proper involvement and a
genuine partnership based on individual need.
How can realistic choices be made without knowledge?
The road to recovery is a long hard journey, never smooth
and always with the risk of losing the way. Complex
journeys may need highly qualified, professional support,
less complex journeys may call for a lower level of support
but all support needs to be delivered by someone who
works in a collaborative way with the service user; who
values diversity; who understands the basic requirements
inherent in developing a relationship based on trust.
Sometimes the process can be overcomplicated by
systems and procedures when a simpler,common sense
approach is more effective.
My belief in recoverywas sparked, not in high-blown
consultation, but by the kind, respectful ordinariness of a
unit cleaner who saw me as a person, not an illness and
communicated with an uncomplicated compassion that
was in stark contrast to my experiences with many
professionals. Once belief was there then the faltering
process of healing could begin.
Bill Davidson
User Involvement Lead, National Workforce Programme/New Ways of Working
Research Associate, King's College London, University of Wales Swansea
Patient Consultant, Royal College of Nursing, Leadership Programme
The Journal of Mental Health Workforce Development Volume 1 Issue 2 October 2006 © Pavilion Journals (Brighton) Ltd
To continue reading
Request your trial