The role of Social
Role Valorisation in the community
Contents
Each community has a particular role that fulfils a particular need.
Valued community roles provide a common cause or focus for the
community, as well as other communities that are a part of it.
Valued communities provide valued roles for their members.
Social role valorisation provides valued roles for ALL members of the
community.
Communities that have valued roles in society …
... The spiritual community
... The family community
... The living community
... The recreational community
... The learning community
... The employment community
... The health community
... The internet community
... The blind community
... The disability community
etc
The values of community start in the home where children have valued
roles in supporting others at school, sport or any other community that
they participate in.
Communities that have de-valued roles in society …
... The AIDS community
... The drugs / rave communities
... The criminal community
... The gay / lesbian communities
... The Muslim community
... The bikie community
... The street community
... The unemployment / homeless communities
... The aged community
... The single parent community
etc
Social
Role Valorisation
(
Top)
SRV is designed to enhance Social Images and Personal Competencies
where disadvantaged people are more likely to be included in society
(at a personal level, the immediate social system around that person
(family, friends, colleagues, workers in institutions etc.), the
intermediate social system that the person interacts with (people in
shops, banks, organisations etc. plus those institutions themselves.)
and the larger society- the socio-political-economic structures of
society. (
Diligio:
Social Role Valorization - Understanding SRV (April 2004). P.79-80).
The paradigm focuses on creating valued roles for the person within the
community. There is nothing about creating a valued role for the
community, or the roles of the members of the community in supporting
people with high support needs.
I feel that the SRV needs to be reformulated to include:
All
members of all communities, clubs and groups within society.
Where they are all
valued, and have a
valued role in participating in
each community (club, group or organisation) within society,
that is most appropriate
to their own
needs, as well as the needs of
each community in which they participate,
where the outcomes are
positively
valued by ALL members of the
community, as well as other communities that it is a part of.
The above has more relevance in today’s society. Generally, the
conditions that people with disability live in today have changed. They
are more likely to have a valued role in society. Whether they are any
better of today, as compared to the conditions that they lived in and
the conditions of the society that they lived in, is open to conjecture
and is being debated by the various stakeholders in society. We see
that the current formulation of SRV can not deal with the changing
needs of the communities that people with high support needs are placed
in.
A community approach to SRV, on the other hand, is more inclusive and
more descriptive (explicit) in the sense that the term "community" can
be used to describe our roles, relationships, behaviours and
expectations with each other. A school community, for example, is
different to a living community, which is different to a recreational
community. While each community is different and has different
outcomes, they share simular characteristics and institutions.
When used properly, SRV is an effective strategy in proving
disadvantaged people a better quality of life. However, the above shows
that needs to be some caution in applying it's principles in any
situation. Are we trying to empower a person through SRV ? Are we
trying to provide a valued role through empowerment ? What is the
person’s role in the process ? Does the person have the necessary
skills and resources? What is the community's role in the process ?
Does the community have the necessary skills and resources ?
What happens when the nature of a person's disability means that a
positively valued role cannot be created for the person ? People with
severe CP etc are not able to fulfill a role means that the value must
come from somewhere else, rather than the role. We need to provide the
community with a valued role (through various strategies) in supporting
the person. A person with a severe disability that cannot have a role
assigned to them, or be placed in an existing role, still has the
opportunity to be treated and valued the same as you or me.
By using SRV in a supportive role that provides the foundation for the
model of service delivery, rather than the model itself, we can see
that values are more than a persons role (person cantered), they are
the way we share our experiences and relationships with others within
an activity, within a setting (person <-> community).
Respect: (
Top)
We need to respect the
wishes of the
community (school, person, family and relatives, and other members of
the community) in their decision that the support or activity may not
suitable, or that they want the support or activity provided in a
certain way, even when it is against the principles of SRV. (as opposed
to legal issues, human rights issues, moral issues, cultural issues,
medical issues etc, which are beyond the scope of this paper). We can
explain our reasons and the benefits for doing something a particular
way, but we need to keep in mind that the customer is always right. We
need to respect their institutions (values, customs and cultures etc).
Only by gaining their trust and confidence can we make any difference
in their lives. Having the opportunity to learn from experience and
make informed decisions about their lives is the first step towards
empowerment. Also, by understanding their perspective, there is the
possibility that we may learn something new through the experience.
Patronising: (
Top)
It is too easy to
patronise people that
have high support needs. We may unconsciously behave in a way that may
do more harm than good. An example is where a person has a painting or
pottery that has the persons name on it, and it is obvious that the
person could not have created the work him/her self. By rewarding the
person for the work (e.g.: that's a great painting you did, and you got
a prize for it, you are very creative) can be demeaning to the person.
We need to focus on what the person can do and the positive aspects of
the person. In doing this we are less likely to set the person up for
ridicule or failure.
Communication: (
Top)
Effective communication
between members
is vital to organisational planing. Communication is not a one way
exchange. The community needs to be able to communicate with its
members in order to achieve its goals. The members communicate with
each other to share thoughts, feelings, experiences, skills and
knowledge. Clear thinking and expression of thoughts is essential to
effective communication. The community also needs to communicate with
others outside the community. To function effectively as a community,
the community needs to be able to respond to events that are outside
the community and have an impact on the community. Communication allows
the members to understand their role and the roles of others in the
community.
Effective communication ..
all members feel a part of
the process
all members are valued for their input
the community runs smoothly, efficiently and effectively
(
Top)
In the goal to provide
"the good things
in life" to disadvantaged people, there is a risk that we may shelter
them from the perceived bad things. We may deny the person the
experience of something we feel that may or may not be in the best
interests of the person. We place our own values and experiences on the
activity and make decisions, based on those values and experiences, on
what the person can or can not participate in. The person is denied the
opportunity to learn from the experience and make an informed decision
about the experience. Instead of encouraging people to do things
themselves, we may do it for them because it is easier that
taking the time to assist them. In time the person looses the skills
that they once had because those things are done for them.
Placed in
unrealistic settings:
(
Top)
People are sometimes put
into settings
that are often counter productive to the person and the others that are
participating in the activity. While the intention is to provide a
person with the experiences of everyday life, we may forget that others
in the setting are also participating in the activity. We have a
responsibility to the person and the others that the person fits into
the setting as much as possible. In a train, for example, a person with
an intellectual disability is walking up and down the aisle with the
aide. The aide is familiar with the persons behaviour and assumes that
the behaviour is acceptable. The behaviour is unsettling to the other
passengers who are not familiar with the person and only reinforces
their negative perceptions and expectations of people that have an
intellectual disability in general. When travelling in a train the
accepted behaviour (custom) is to sit down or stand stationary. Anyone
(white, black, green or has a disability) that walks up and down a
train will be seen as strange.
Place
unrealistic expectations
on others participating in the
activity: (
Top)
By including a person with
high support
needs (with an aide) in a classroom with other "normal" people, the
person may be a distraction to the class, and the others are
disadvantaged. If not done properly, it is possible that the others in
the classroom may feel some resentment towards the person with high
support needs being included in the activity.
Conflict of interests /
policies: (
Top)
Often, a person with high
support needs
has a number of characteristics that need specialist care. The person
may have a medical condition that requires regular attention. Do we
allow the person to participate in the activity with appropriate
medical care, or do we deny the person the opportunity to participate
in the activity because of the particular condition? Or do we deny the
person the opportunity to participate because of a particular policy or
rule of the service provider? Do we refer to the residents by their
name (respect) or as a room number (confidentiality - this does
actually happen).
Conflict in
models of care:
(
Top)
Conflict between the
values of the
medical approach vrs the values of the social approach towards service
delivery in providing the most appropriate care (providing medical care
vrs providing a home like environment). People with high support needs
often need special attention to their personal needs (feeding,
medications at special times, toileting etc). Do we take them out of
their setting to give them their lunch in another more private setting?
Do we wake them up three or four times at night to give their
medications or check their pads, when the medications can be given and
the pads can be checked, at other times. Do we insist that a person
goes out for an activity when the person is sick, has a runny nose or a
cold.
Balancing the needs of the person, with the needs of the others in the
setting, with the needs of the staff, with the needs of the service
provider:
In any setting there is always going to be a conflict in meeting the
needs of all members. Staff can not be at two places at once, equipment
etc can only be used by one person at a time. Residents in an
accommodation setting often have their independence taken away from
them because staff have other things to do and can not spend time with
the resident, or there is a lack of communication between staff and the
resident, or the activity or behaviour of a resident does not fit into
the routine of the residence. Staff are also often undervalued and
taken for granted in providing support. Staff also need to be respected
and valued in their role in supporting people with disability.
May be seen as a nuisance
or a
troublemaker:
(
Top)
Where a person with a
disability is
trying to standup for his/her basic rights, they may be punished for
upsetting the normal routine of the facility. If a resident wants to
stay up late, for example, they may be disciplined in some way or just
ignored because the resident has always gone to bed at a certain time.
The immediate family of a people with high support needs may see
something that they feel in not in the best interests of the person.
They may try to step in to a work place and start telling the staff how
to do their job.
They are seen as:
Interfering in the workplace
Snooping into other peoples business
Interrupting the normal rhythm and routine of the workplace
Symbols of authority:
(
Top)
Within the service
setting, we see
symbols of authority:
Residents are often referred to as clients, patients or even room
numbers.
Staff office.
Staff name tags.
Report books and charts.
Ownership of individuals through direct intervention in the provision
of care.
Association to a
service provider:
(
Top)
The service provider may
promote itself
in the wider community as supporting a particular group to raise
awareness and support through advertising, signs, labels, brochures and
various community activities The individual may be seen as an object of
charity. Just as a group of school children become associated with a
particular school, or people that wear leather jackets and chains are
associated with bike groups, people with an intellectual or physical
disability may become associated with a particular service provider.
Profiling: (
Top)
Profiling is the practice
of targeting
a specific group according to a set of criteria (disability, age,
income or activity). This practice may disadvantage some groups is as
much as they may not be eligible, or the service may not be available
in a certain area, or they are grouped together with others of the same
characteristics.
Normalisation
of practice (
Top)
Over a period of time, a
particular
activity or behaviour may become embedded into the culture of the
community (institutionalised). What may be appropriate at a particular
time in a particular situation may become generalised (as a learned
behaviour) and accepted a part of the normal routine of the community.
Societies also absorb cultures and institutions from other societies
where members of both live together. Sometimes members try to revive
the cultures and institutions that have been lost. A resident used to
stay up late, for example, and dance to music. The person always had a
good sleep and was happy. With the change of staff, the person no
longer stays up. The normal practice now is for the person to go to bed
early. The person becomes cranky and difficult because 1) the activity
has been removed, and 2) the resident spends an excessive amount of
time in bed. All of a sudden the resident has a behavioural problem and
as a result has a management plan as well as medications to control the
bevaviour.
Leadership: (
Top)
Any formal/informal
cultures, policies,
values, behaviours, expectations within a community or workplace are
generally determined by the community leaders, managers, or influential
people within the community or work place. Strong leadership influences
the behaviours of the members by the "style" of leadership. This is
most noticable in the workplace where the manager has a medical
background as apposed to a public service background. While the values
of the organisation are supported by both styles, the way in which they
are carried out may be quite different. We also see the same thing in
politics, where each party upholds the Australian constitution, they
all have different policies, objectives and agendas. Weak leadership
also means that the community can become unfocused on the goals of the
community. Different power groups struggle for control, or the
community tries to do to much, or not enough (uncoordinated).
