At 12:04 PM 1/28/99 +0000, you wrote:
>
>
This raises the inevitable question, "What can the money be spent
>on?" - or, put another way, "What is to be described as a 'need' with
>the terms of this arangement?"
>
>There is a logical tension between a broad view of 'needs' derived from a
>notion of 'reasonable quality of independent life', and a very
>circumscribed view based on the concept of risk-management and the
>avoidance of (more expensive) residential care. This tension has to be
>resolved in the negotiation which tkes place between the Client and Social
>Worker: the trouble is that Clients are generally disempowered and at a
>disadvantaged in representing their own interests as robustly as they might
>in this negotiation. For example, people are only likely to ask for
>services they know to be available rather than seek innovative solutions.
>Furthermore, people often don't like to get stroppy in dealing with
>service-providing agencies because they are frightened of losing what
>they've already been allocated.
This requires some time to answer...and i think another would be able to
answer better than I could. However I must support you in your
acknowledgment of the open (but closed) question of needs. Provide people
with information about the life choices we all (well many)have and let the
person decide , however assisted, WITHOUT talking in terms of what
approaches, services, and models of service already exist. This is
something I have seen often and what it does is confines the person's
thinking to non-innovative and perhaps unsatisfactory approaches to meeting
their needs.
An quick example of a restrictive question would be "what are your needs in
regard to respite care?.......dream a little". Well thats nice to get
people to use their imagination but the question has already decided that
the need is 'respite' therefore needs will be articulated as needs that can
be met by respite services.
Rather they should just say...."if you had the money, what would you do to
make life easier and happier for yourself?" Maybe we would hear about some
real needs then.
Oh...and dont leave off leisure from the gamut of life options.
With best regards
Laurence Bathurst
University of Sydney
School of Occupation and Leisure Sciences
Faculty of Health Sciences
East Street (P.O. Box 170)
Lidcombe NSW 1825
Australia
Ph+ 61 2 9351 9509
Fax+ 61 2 9351 9166
E-mail [log in to unmask]
Note: This is the e-mail address for my home as well
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
There is not one shred of evidence that supports the notion that life is
serious.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|