Skip to main content

Advocacy for Service Users and Carers in Community Learning Disability Team Meetings When Service Users and Carers Are Absent

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Interprofessional Care and Mental Health

Part of the book series: The Language of Mental Health ((TLMH))

  • 905 Accesses

Abstract

Many MDT team meetings occur where service users and their carers are absent. Service user views therefore need careful representation. Advocacy for service users is often undertaken by someone designated as an advocate. In an MDT meeting, there is no designated single advocate. Each clinician has a professional duty to advocate for service users. We examined how clinicians did this in MDT meetings. Elongated advocacy sequences occurred when there was a barrier to service access. Barriers originated from: the MDT, external services, or the service users family or social network. Advocacy was achieved through storytelling. This was punctuated with persuasive conversational devices: use of personal emotional responses, direct and indirect reported speech, re-enactments and contrast structures. Implications for advocating for service users are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Booth, T., & Booth, W. (1996). Sounds of silence: Narrative research with inarticulate subjects. Disability and Society, 11(1), 55–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campagna, K. D. (2013). Who will be the patient advocate on a multidisciplinary team? Hospital Pharmacy, 48(2), 90–92. http://doi.org/10.1310/hpj4802-90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gluyas, H. (2015). Patient-centred care: Improving healthcare outcomes. Nursing Standard, 30(4), 50–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, L., & Hughes, D. (1994). “Innocent parties” and “disheartening” experiences: Natural rhetoric’s in neuro-rehabilitation admissions conferences. Qualitative Health Research, 4(4), 385–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansson, E., Ekman, I., Swedberg, K., Wolf, A., Dudas, K., Ehlers, L., & Olsson, L. (2015). Person-centred care for patients with chronic heart failure—A cost-utility analysis. European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474515114567035.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Haugh, M. (2010). Jocular mockery, (dis)affiliation, and face. Journal of Pragmatics, 42, 2106–2119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henry, L., & Gudjonsson, G. (1999). Eye-witness memory and suggestibility in children with mental retardation. American Journal of Mental Retardation, 104(6), 491–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hepburn, A., & Potter, J. (2007). Crying receipts: Time, empathy, and institutional practice. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 40(1), 89–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351810701331299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holt, E. (2017). Indirect reported speech in storytelling: Its position. Design, and Uses, Research on Language and Social Interaction, 50(2), 171–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2017.1301302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jefferson, G. (1984). Transcript notation. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. ix–xvi). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandelbaum, J. (2013). Storytelling in conversation. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), Handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 492–508). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • McGrath, P., Holewa, H., & McGrath, Z. (2006). Nursing advocacy in an Australian multidisciplinary context: Findings on medico-centrism. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Science, 20(4), 394–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pilnick, A., Clegg, J., Murphy, E., & Almack, K. (2010). Questioning the answer: Questioning style, choice and self-determination in interactions with young people with intellectual disabilities. Sociology of Health and Illness, 32(3), 415–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sklar, M., Aarons, G., O’Connell, M., Davidson, L., & Groessl, E. (2015). Mental health recovery in the patient-centered medical home. American Journal of Public Health, 105(9), 1926–1934.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone, S. (2008). A retrospective evaluation of the impact of the Planetree patient-centered model of care on inpatient quality outcomes. Health Environments Research and Design Journal, 1(4), 55–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Cordet Smart or Holly Reed .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Smart, C., Reed, H. (2018). Advocacy for Service Users and Carers in Community Learning Disability Team Meetings When Service Users and Carers Are Absent. In: Smart, C., Auburn, T. (eds) Interprofessional Care and Mental Health. The Language of Mental Health. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98228-1_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics