Search

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to provide a commentary on Pytlowana and Stenfert Kroese's article on the experiences of professionals working with parents with learning disabilities by exploring challenges and good practice in this area. Design/methodology/approach: Key areas of practice were identified for further exploration by drawing on research studies with parents with learning disabilities. Findings: While there is growing evidence of good practice around working with parents with learning disabilities, a number of challenges around communication and relationship-based practice remain. The paper recommends further training and education for those working in this complex area of practice. Originality/value: The paper adds value by bringing together evidence from across a number of studies to highlight good practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Evidence suggests that parents with intellectual disabilities can be "good enough" parents with appropriate support that focuses on the whole family. This paper brings together theories of vulnerability with an ethics of care approach to reflect on challenges for practitioners in supporting parents, drawing upon data from a study carried out in Scotland. Method: An online survey was administered to practitioners in three settings, and follow‐up interviews were carried out with key informants. Results: Pockets of good practice existed but a number of barriers to supporting families remained. These related to a lack of accessible information, difficulties in identifying and engaging with families at an early stage and poor joint working across agencies. Conclusion: The study concludes by arguing that practitioners' constructions of families as "vulnerable" reflects negatively on their perceived capacity to parent, creating further barriers in accessing appropriate support and reducing expectations of success. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores the usefulness of recognition theory, recovery, and citizenship in explaining constructions of community by adults who have experienced life disruptions participating in similar citizenship programs in the United States and Scotland. A content analysis of secondary data was undertaken and focus groups held with recent graduates of both programs. The findings indicate that constructions of community aligned significantly with aspects of identity and common experience rather than location. Moving toward an identity framed by assets rather than deficits was further identified, which reflects the need for recognition to be extended by communities that are well informed and nondiscriminatory in their attitudes toward those with life disruptions to promote inclusion and connectedness. Interventions at the level of community development and engagement are therefore crucial in promoting inclusion and increasing citizenship for marginalized groups alongside the role of social movements and public policy in tackling stigma and discriminatory attitudes. Uniquely, within this project, a theoretical framework that combined elements of recognition theory, recovery, and citizenship emerged that best explained the experience of those with life disruptions and provided direction for a future focus on community development as well as recovery and citizenship-oriented practice. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Purpose -- This article seeks to consider the links between emerging concepts of citizenship in the twenty-first century and the legitimization of this agenda by providing an overview of UK policy as it relates to adult protection as well as consideration of concepts of citizenship and the links between the two areas. Design/methodology/approach -- The paper provides an overview of adult protection in the UK and then takes the reader through concepts of vulnerability and citizenship and considers the implications of these concepts on the citizenship of those most likely to be subject to adult protection procedures in the UK. Findings -- This article shows how models of citizenship have altered over time to reflect societal norms and customs and in particular how this paradigm shift has legitimized intervention in the lives of adults. It further highlights the likely impact of adult protection procedures on the citizenship rights of those most likely to experience them. Originality/value -- The paper brings together conceptual discourses on citizenship and adult protection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There has been increasing interest and research attention towards citizenship‐based practices and care within health and social care settings. A framework for implementing citizenship‐based interventions has helped support the participation in society of persons who have experienced major life disruptions. Yet, having ways to measure the impact of citizenship 'in action' within specific socio‐cultural contexts has proved challenging. We report on the development of the Strathclyde Citizenship Measure (SCM) which seeks to establish a psychometrically sound measure of citizenship that is relevant to the Scottish context. We outline the three phases of developing the SCM: (1) item generation, (2) item reduction and piloting, and (3) measure validation. Having generated items for the SCM using concept mapping techniques, we piloted it with 407 participants who completed an online survey of a 60‐item version of the SCM. The aims were to assess the validity of the items and reduce the number of items using principal components analysis for the final measure. This resulted in a 39 item SCM. We then sought to establish the psychometric properties of this shorter version of the SCM through testing its reliability, convergent, concurrent and discriminant validity. The 39 item SCM was administered online to 280 Scottish residents along with additional measures including the Warwick‐Edinburgh Mental Well‐being Scale (WEMWBS), the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS21), the Sense of Belonging Instrument (SOBI‐A); the Big Five Personality Inventory (Shortened Version; BFI‐10) and the Personal Social Capital Scale (PSCS‐16). The factor structure and dimensionality of the SCM was examined using exploratory factor analysis and it was found to be reliable and valid. This paper explores the potential for the application of the SCM across health and social care settings and identifies future work to develop citizenship tools to facilitate dialogues about citizenship across health and social care practice settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Accessible summary [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The development of integrated working across health and social care has featured strongly in recent policy directives in both England and Scotland. This is part of a wider agenda of partnership and collaboration, with a range of options from the creation of unified structures as in the care trusts in England to localized arrangements for joint working between individual professionals. This article presents a detailed matrix of drivers and barriers to integrated working which has been developed through a number of case studies of community care practice pursued as part of work undertaken for the Joint Future Group of the Scottish Executive. Drivers and barriers in three key areas are highlighted: national policy frameworks, the local planning context, and operational factors. It is anticipated that the matrix should provide a useful framework for the detailed scrutiny and operationalization of integrated working. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Citizenship is gaining currency in health and social care internationally as a way of making sense of the lived experiences of people with major life disruptions who face exclusion, marginalisation and discrimination, but the concept is often contested, poorly defined and understood. This paper charts the development of an empirical model of citizenship within Scotland, UK. A mixed‐method, community‐based participatory research approach using 10 focus groups (n = 77), concept‐mapping exercises (n = 45) and statement clarity and relevant ratings (n = 242) was used to develop a model of citizenship that is grounded in the lived experience of participants, which is absent from current conceptualisations of citizenship. Multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analysis revealed five core domains emerging from our work: 'building relationships', 'autonomy and acceptance', 'access to services and supports', 'shared values and social roles' and 'civic rights and responsibilities' representing the personal meanings of citizenship for participants. We argue that the value of this model is that it is draws upon the personal understandings and experiences of participants who emphasised the 'banal ordinariness' of its core elements. We suggest that the model makes an original contribution by clearly illustrating the practical applicability of citizenship as a concept; thus, enhancing existing theories of citizenship. Our model highlights the interplay between the relational and structural aspects of citizenship and acknowledges the barriers that marginalised groups face in claiming their citizenship rights. It offers a call to action for policy makers and practitioners to set goals that contribute to the social inclusion of those who have experienced major life disruptions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Citizenship has been promoted within mental health for several decades however, its application in the field of mental health policy and practice is relatively novel. The voices of people who experience mental health problems (MHPs) are often absent in ongoing discourses about citizenship. To explore how adults with experience of MHPs and other life disruptions identify potential barriers to citizenship. A community based participatory research approach was adopted with peer researchers. Six focus groups (N = 40) using semi-structured interviews were conducted, consisting of participants who had experience of MHPs and other life disruption(s) within the last 5 years. The focus groups were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed in NVIVO using a thematic approach. Three major themes associated with participants lived experiences of barriers to citizenship were identified: 'stigmatisation (internal & external) creates further divide'; 'being socially excluded leads to isolation'; and 'a sense of difference (as perceived by the self and others)'. Those who have experienced major life disruption(s) face multi-level barriers to citizenship. An awareness of such barriers has important implications for mental health research, policy and practice. Citizenship-oriented implementation strategies that aim to address multi-level barriers merit further investigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]