Collecting feedback as a tool to reduce care paralysis: something for family group conferencing coordinators?

Abstract

Family group conferencing (FGC) coordinators in public mental healthcare are confronted with clients who have little faith in professionals and organizations, who hold off decisions in their family life, who avoid care and who sometimes behave in a hostile manner. A lack of initiative to deal with their situation is not only reserved for clients – all bystanders, including professionals, can suffer from it. The multiplicity and severity of the client\u27s problems lead to a situation wherein everyone involved waits for the initiative of the other. The independence of the FGC coordinator – a fellow citizen, who is free of organizational loyalties and comes to assist other citizens in establishing a plan – seems to work well with the client group of the public mental healthcare. However, the coordinator cannot always prevent deferral or failure of conferences. Drawing on empirical and theoretical findings, this paper considers the possibility of collecting feedback as a way to contribute positively to the alliance between FGC coordinators and those for whom a conference is deployed. We highlight findings from three case studies that centred on multiproblem families. The findings indicate the importance of feedback theory for FGC coordinators in enhancing trust and engagement

‘Let us be’. Social support needs of people with acquired long‐term disabilities and their caregivers in rehabilitation practice in the Netherlands

“…Some of these reasons resemble barriers found in previous studies in adult healthcare and welfare, such as the concern over being a burden (Metze et al, 2015b, 2019) and shame and fear of rejection (de Jong & Schout, 2013a, 2013b; de Jong, Schout, & Abma, 2015; de Jong, Schout, Pennell, et al, 2015; de Jong et al, 2018; Meijer et al, 2019; Metze et al, 2015a, 2015b; Schout et al, 2017; Schout & de Jong, 2017). The reluctance to ask for (more) support confirms prior research on the principle of reciprocity (Mauss, 2002) in public mental healthcare, general social welfare and elderly social welfare (Bredewold et al, 2016; de Jong, Schout, & Abma, 2015; de Jong, Schout, Pennell, et al, 2015; Malmberg‐Heimonen & Johansen, 2014; Metze et al, 2015a, 2015b).…”

The outsider within: The agentic practices of Family Group Conference coordinators in the context of families with children at risk

“…Coordinators also stressed the importance of adequately preparing the family for the conference to reduce their anxiety (Connolly, 2006a(Connolly, , 2006b. Moreover, Schout and de Jong (2017) found that coordinators encourage families to speak up and make their voices heard by asking questions and sharing feedback. Finally, in a randomized controlled trial conducted on FGC in England, which found the model to be cost effective and to reduce the likelihood of children going into care as compared with the control group, the coordinator participants described positive outcomes of FGC, including expansion of the family support, and families feeling heard and empowered (Taylor et al, 2023).…”

“…The above‐noted review highlights how essential the coordinator's role is to the FGC model. Moreover, that “the coordinator should be a gifted citizen with natural abilities to mobilize groups” (Schout & de Jong, 2017, p. 1198) is apparent from the eclectic practices that coordinators implement. The current article proposes the agentic framework to understand what these practices are and how they can assist coordinators in managing the challenges inherent to the FGC dynamic.…”