23.07.2013 Views

Geriatric Mental Health Disaster and Emergency Preparedness

Geriatric Mental Health Disaster and Emergency Preparedness

Geriatric Mental Health Disaster and Emergency Preparedness

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

116 <strong>Geriatric</strong> <strong>Mental</strong> <strong>Health</strong> <strong>Disaster</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Emergency</strong> <strong>Preparedness</strong><br />

<strong>and</strong> it can also be used to conduct a review of each stage of the service process<br />

in the left-h<strong>and</strong> column of Figure 6.1 in order to achieve best practice<br />

<strong>and</strong> to learn from each experience.<br />

The authors’ way of facilitating this focuses on the people involved—<br />

client groups <strong>and</strong> practitioners—rather than procedures, thus ensuring<br />

the services delivered are sensitive to the needs of survivors <strong>and</strong> their<br />

communities. The use of anticipatory reflection (Sully, et al., 2008; Sully &<br />

Dallas, 2005) enables practitioners to use their past experiences <strong>and</strong> knowledge<br />

together with their present experiences in writing contingency plans<br />

to prepare themselves for future action, as described in more detail by Wilson<br />

(2008).<br />

The inclusion, as part of the protocols of structured cofacilitated reflective<br />

practice sessions during all phases of the service provision cycle—<br />

from contingency planning to service evaluation—along with the evidence<br />

base for practice, is arguably one of the foundations on which person- <strong>and</strong><br />

community-centered emergency responses can be developed <strong>and</strong> sustained.<br />

It also provides a container in which practitioners can explore their<br />

anxieties about teamwork <strong>and</strong> service delivery within <strong>and</strong> across disciplines,<br />

communities, <strong>and</strong> nations.<br />

REFERENCES<br />

Agass, D. (2000). Containment, supervision, <strong>and</strong> abuse. In U. McCluskey & C. A. Hooper<br />

(Eds.), Psychodynamic perspectives on abuse: The cost of fear (pp . 209–222). London:<br />

Jessica Kingsley Publishers.<br />

Bion, W. R. (1961). Experiences in groups: And other papers. New York: Basic Books.<br />

Boud, D., Keogh, R., & Walker, D. (Eds.). (1985). Refl ection: Turning experience into<br />

learning. London: Kogan Page.<br />

Casement, P. (1985). On learning from the patient. London: Tavistock.<br />

Clarke, G., & Rowan, A. (2009). Looking again at the team dimension in systemic psychotherapy:<br />

Is attending to group process a critical context for practice? Journal of<br />

Family Therapy, 31 (1), 85–107.<br />

Hawkins, P., & Shohet, R. (2006). Supervision in the helping professions (3rd ed.). Basingstoke,<br />

UK: Oxford University Press.<br />

Hazler, R. (2001). Somehow therapy works: Core conditions of the facilitative therapeutic<br />

environment. In R. Hazler & N. Barwick (Eds.), The therapeutic environment<br />

(pp. 4–12). Buckingham, UK: Oxford University Press.<br />

Herman, J. L. (1992). Trauma <strong>and</strong> recovery. London: P<strong>and</strong>ora.<br />

Hoff, L. A., Hallisey, B. J., & Hoff, M. (2009). People in crisis: Clinical <strong>and</strong> diversity perspectives<br />

(6th ed.). New York: Routledge.<br />

Howard F. (2008). Managing stress or enhancing well-being? Positive psychology’s contributions<br />

to clinical supervision. Australian Psychologist , 43 (2), 105–113.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!