Most programs for people who have
sexually abused say they follow Risk, Need, and Responsivity. This is a good
thing, but do they really do that? We know that some programs ignore risk,
while others don’t really focus on specific client needs. In my opinion,
however, the biggest problem with RNR is that we still don’t know what to make
of responsivity.
I work with a lot of clients with intellectual
disabilities or other cognitive problems. I try to make sure that clients get
assessed, treated, and managed in a way that fits their special needs, but what
do I mean by special needs? Is it just low IQ or some kind of brain injury, or
do we need to think about other problems? What about fetal alcohol effects?
What about mental illness? Also, what about clients who were in prison for a
very long time who can’t think so well anymore because prison didn’t give them
much practice? This definition may be a bit broad, but the point I really want
to make is that clients with special needs require special treatment – with
specialized tools and procedures. Sometimes, this means we have to be creative.
Now that we know who the special needs
people are, how we help them with their problems? A real problem with many
programs is that they don’t have books or exercises that were made for special
needs clients. Can we use those programs as they were originally written? Do we
just talk slower? Do we make the program longer and give it in smaller bits? Research
and experience tell us that slower and longer may help some clients, but no
special changes at all doesn’t really work. Slower and longer may also lead to
problems. My good friend tells a story of his early career when he was trying
to explain something to an intellectually disabled client – slower and longer. After
getting frustrated, the client said, “Man, I’m retarded. I’m not stupid!” Easier
language, with more pictures, repetition, and social stories helps. We also
need to remember that nobody likes to have their nose rubbed in their problems,
so respect is also really important. What we work on may end up being pretty much
the same, but we need to remember that special needs requires special attention.
Managing risk also requires a different approach.
Sadly, many special needs clients will never enjoy the same quality of life as their
friends without difficulties. A lot of staff are now focused on the idea that special
needs clients have the same rights as people without disabilities or cognitive
problems. I’m not totally sure about this. I agree that all special needs
clients should be able to live as normal a life as possible, but I think we
need to be realistic. Do our special needs clients also have the right to good
service? What if getting good service means that some clients won’t get to do what
they want to? Is that fair? I understand the need to ensure equal opportunity,
but being kind and caring enough not to let clients fail is also important.
Bill Marshall says Warm, Empathic, Rewarding, and Directive – I agree.
So, that’s 529 words…but they’re 529 words
with an average character length of 4.5 and an overall Grade level of 7.2.
Still too high for most of our special needs clients, but keep in mind, I’m a
psychologist.
Robin J. Wilson, Ph.D., ABPP
Sarasota, FL
No comments:
Post a Comment