Experiences of two multidisciplinary team members of systemic consultations in a community learning disability service

Abstract

Accessible Summary People with learning disabilities may have help from their families, paid carers and professionals such as nurses, psychologists etc. Professionals (like psychologists) can help people with learning disabilities and their families, carers and other professionals by meeting to talk about solutions together. This is called a systemic consultation. We asked two people who came to the systemic consultations what they thought was helpful and unhelpful about the systemic consultations. The two people we asked were two professionals who worked with people with learning disabilities. The helpful things were that the systemic consultations might have helped people to feel better about themselves and speak about their worries. People may feel that others care about them too. People with learning disabilities started to find their own answers to the difficulties they had. We found that the people who were responsible for the systemic consultations asked some helpful questions. For example, they spoke in a positive way and tried to talk about the things that people were good at. Another helpful thing was that coming to the systemic consultations helped people to get on better with each other. The unhelpful things were that people coming to the systemic consultations thought that something else would happen at the consultations. They also thought that sometimes there were too many people at the systemic consultations. They said that it was not helpful if the people who help in the systemic consultations change. After looking at the answers the people gave, we talked about the things that can be done to make sure that systemic consultations become more helpful for everyone. Abstract BackgroundSystemic approaches can be useful in working with people with learning disabilities and their network. The evidence base for these approaches within the field of learning disabilities, however, is currently limited. Materials and MethodsThis article presents part of a service evaluation of systemic consultations in a Community Learning Disability Service (CLDS). Two multidisciplinary team professionals were interviewed about what they found helpful and unhelpful in their experiences of attending systemic consultations. Interview data were analysed via applying thematic analysis principles. ResultsFive main themes were elicited: differing expectations, enabling for the client, positive techniques, uncertainty regarding “forum” (“forum” meaning the collective of all of the individuals meet, which could include the professionals, lead therapist, reflecting team, etc.) composition and strengthening the network. ConclusionsSystemic consultations provided some positive and valuable experiences along with important caveats. Considerations for clinical practice are therefore discussed. Continued evaluation of systemic consultations within CLDSs is recommended.

Effects of Mindfulness Training Program on the Impulsivity Among Students with Learning Disabilities

“…This fact was also confirmed by many studies that children with learning disabilities exhibit an inability to perceive information, have emotional, behavioral, and cognitive deficits, exhibit problems in executive functions and memory, and have insufficient attention, which makes them face many difficulties during the implementation of the tasks and school assignments (Enoch, 2015;Haydicky et al, 2012;Montague, 2008). Therefore, the impact of learning disability is essential, widespread and has negative repercussions in the long term, especially in the learning process and academic performance, and therefore educators and specialists should intervene to face these problems before they are exacerbated, and ensure healthy well-being is provided to those children (Johnson & Viljoen, 2017;Wilson et al, 2009).…”

“You’re changing the pattern”: cognitive analytic team formulation with learning disabilities care staff

“…Most research on team formulation consists of small-n studies and evaluations focusing on staff-focused outcomes such as increasing staff satisfaction (Allen, 2015;Chiffey et al, 2015), improving team functioning (Craven-Staines et al, 2010), generation of psychologically-informed care plans (Wainwright and Bergin, 2010), self-efficacy (Maguire, 2006) and perceptions of "stuckness" (Allen, 2015). Research on team formulations and systemic consultations (which similarly intervene at the system level) in learning disabilities suggest staff experience sessions as helpful for developing a shared understanding of clients, allowing space to think and reflect, and developing new clinical strategies (Rikberg Smyly et al, 2008;Ingham, 2011;Wilcox, 2013;Fennessy et al, 2015;Whitton et al, 2016;Johnson and Viljoen, 2017;Turner et al, 2018).…”

Drawing in not encouraging away: systemic team formulation to support the trauma-informed care of a lady with intellectual disabilities, in the context of COVID-19

“…Best practice guidance highlights the value of working relationally and systemically with the networks and teams surrounding individuals with intellectual disability (ID) and the adaption of psychological interventions to best meet the preferences, understanding and needs of each individual (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, 2016; The British Psychological Society, 2018). Johnson and Viljoen (2017) discuss that like many other interventions used in ID settings (e.g. positive behavioural support and applied behavioural analysis), working with a system is important in facilitating change.…”