Carol_Sherriff
07-23-2008, 09:10 PM
I wonder whether anyone has any advice they can give me or links to resources that might be helpful.
I am facilitating a review of a service user council where the members of the council are mental health service users.
On one level the task is pretty straight forward - the council to date has not been well organised, commitments made are not stuck to etc and the Council has become dysfunctional because members are walking away. they have however achieved some good stuff that can be built on.
Individuals are being scapegoated but, as with any other group, the issue is (I think) more systemic than the behaviour of one or two individuals.
I am using a fairly simple framework of reviewing the purpose of the Council, what has gone wrong and what has worked, the values and principles they work to and how they want people to demonstrate those values. I will then move on to recommendations and we are going to look at what has been done elsewhere.
I have done some research into issues with user groups and we are having breaks, short sessions and 'not conventional style meetings' which is what is recommended.
Nevertheless, it is like walking on egg shells. I have one member who cannot make the meetings because she is too ill but the Council want her to contribute. She interprets almost everything said or done as an attack on her and that then winds up all the other members. However, as I said above, while some of this is undoubtedly about her own mental health issues I get the sense she lets everyone else off the hook by playing this role and gets a sort of perverse reward for this (ie she is the centre of attention).
Anyone have any advice, guidance they can offer
Many thanks
Carol
I am facilitating a review of a service user council where the members of the council are mental health service users.
On one level the task is pretty straight forward - the council to date has not been well organised, commitments made are not stuck to etc and the Council has become dysfunctional because members are walking away. they have however achieved some good stuff that can be built on.
Individuals are being scapegoated but, as with any other group, the issue is (I think) more systemic than the behaviour of one or two individuals.
I am using a fairly simple framework of reviewing the purpose of the Council, what has gone wrong and what has worked, the values and principles they work to and how they want people to demonstrate those values. I will then move on to recommendations and we are going to look at what has been done elsewhere.
I have done some research into issues with user groups and we are having breaks, short sessions and 'not conventional style meetings' which is what is recommended.
Nevertheless, it is like walking on egg shells. I have one member who cannot make the meetings because she is too ill but the Council want her to contribute. She interprets almost everything said or done as an attack on her and that then winds up all the other members. However, as I said above, while some of this is undoubtedly about her own mental health issues I get the sense she lets everyone else off the hook by playing this role and gets a sort of perverse reward for this (ie she is the centre of attention).
Anyone have any advice, guidance they can offer
Many thanks
Carol