Capacity to Communicate: Sense's three‐year project training independent mental capacity advocates in communication skills

Abstract

Sense's three-year project training independent mental capacity advocates in communication skills ³ Intensive interaction is an approach to teaching the pre-speech fundamentals of communication to children and adults who have severe learning difficulties and/or autism and who are still at an early stage of communication development. The approach was developed during the 1980s by the team of staff working at Harpersbury Hospital following the work of the late Geraint Ephraim (1979), a psychologist who worked in the Hertfordshire long-stay hospitals. The approach works by progressively developing enjoyable and relaxed interaction sequences between the interaction partner and the person doing the learning. These interaction sequences are repeated frequently and gradually grow in duration, complexity and sophistication. As this happens, the fundamentals of communication are gradually rehearsed and learned in a free-flowing manner.

What is the nature of Mental Capacity Act training and how do health and social care practitioners change their practice post‐training? A narrative review

“…These studies scored between 19–36 on the Hawker et al (2002) indicating generally good quality. We included three case studies: Phair & Manthorpe, 2012; Lee‐Foster, 2010; and Pike, Indge, Leverton, Ford, & Gilbert, 2010. Case studies may be less rigorous in their methods because researchers are evaluating their own work or because the focus of the study is necessarily local and small.…”

“…Three papers report on profession‐specific training (Bose & McFiggans, 2019; Lee‐Foster, 2010; Schofield et al, 2012) and two (Willner et al, 2011, 2013) on mixed groups of trainees. Details of the nature of training and numbers of trainees are generally sparse.…”

“…Details of the nature of training and numbers of trainees are generally sparse. In several papers, the findings reflected a range of training types, in which training might have happened recently (Lee‐Foster, 2010; Schofield et al, 2012; Willner et al, 2011, 2013) or up to 2 years previously (McCormick et al, 2017; Morriss et al, 2017; Phair & Manthorpe, 2012; Sawhney et al, 2009), in which case participants may have attended more than one training intervention. In three cases, MCA training was combined with training in related issues (communication (Lee‐Foster, 2010), record‐keeping (Willner et al, 2013), safeguarding and human rights (Pike et al, 2010)).…”

“…Studies reported on a range of training approaches. Case studies (Lee‐Foster, 2010; Pike et al, 2010) describe stand‐alone initiatives, but make observations and share experiences that offer useful pointers for learning. Pike et al (2010) considered the advantages and disadvantages of e‐learning, concluding that it could be effective for developing basic knowledge and had benefits around flexibility and costs.…”

Deafblind and Neglected or Deafblindness Neglected? Revisiting the Case of Beverley Lewis

“…What specialist deafblind assessment potentially offers is the opportunity to commission tailored support to deafblind adults, including intervention in a person's best interests if the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 are met, thereby possibly reducing the risks of abuse (Matthews, 1990;ADASS, 2005;Kiekopf, 2007a (Brammer, 2009;Lee-Foster, 2010). However, Lee-Foster 2010 In addition to specialist assessment, the deafblind policy guidance (DH, 2009) asks local authorities to ensure that deafblind people have access to specialist services, including one-to-one support from specially trained staff.…”