Welcome to the March edition of TIPS and TOPICS. Spring is in the air for us here in California, but not yet for other parts of the country; and certainly not for our readers Down Under. Sorry that autumn is coming for you, unless you like cold weather, which I do not as I get older.
SAVVY
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tips:
B.
Discharged but with minimal participation
We have all worked with people who sign themselves into treatment,
and then seem to do the bare minimum to participate. You feel
like you're pulling teeth to elicit any meaningful investment
in treatment. The time comes when you feel that enough is enough.
Either the clock has run out - if you are a fixed length of
stay program - or you feel like you are getting nowhere, so
might as well discharge the person. So "Discharged but with
minimal participation" seems to be a reasonable category.
But think about it.
If the client or consumer is so passive in their participation
----
Then there's a good chance the treatment plan and services
you are providing are not meaningful to the client. If you are
doing all the work, the treatment plan may be your plan,
not the client's. So rather than discharging the person, the
treatment plan needs re-working. Fresh and new conversation
with the client is essential to craft a different approach -
one in which the client is invested, and one they are willing
to actively implement.
C.
Transferred to another service
If the client wants treatment, but not at the current
level of care-----
Then the new plan may mean transfer to another service
or site of care within the continuum of care. That may make
sense to do. Weigh it up. If you frequently transfer people
to other services away from your agency, consider why it is
you are repeatedly losing clients to other programs. It could
mean you are not providing the services needed. Perhaps it's
time to re-look at your Mission Statement, examine if it needs
broadening.
If the client has changed his/her mind, really doesn't
want treatment any more, and chooses no further treatment----
Then the Discharge category is just that: Chooses no
further treatment.
D.
Left at staff request/discharged for noncompliance
SAVVY tip 2 addresses this. I believe "Left at staff request/discharged
for noncompliance" is an ill- advised Discharge category. Here
is why.
If the individual is not making sufficient effort in
his/her recovery plan, and your impulse is to invoke this Discharge
category-----
Then first check to see if you have a "customer" for
the treatment plan. If a person is not adhering to the plan,
it may be a lousy plan. It needs to be renegotiated and changed
with the client.
If
the client knows what to do, but doesn't want to do it-----
Then they are choosing no further treatment. The client
has chosen to leave. They are not a "bad client" whom you must
now discharge for being non- compliant. For example, if a client
is struggling with substance use or depression or both, your
experience and expertise tells you total abstinence, therapy
or antidepressants are the preferred treatments to recommend.
You expect client compliance with proven methods.
The client however believes controlled use or less use would
work for them; or therapy only but no medication; or medication
but no therapy. If the client is not in imminent danger of harming
himself or others, we cannot override his will. However we do
want to work with the client to try to attract him into
recovery.
What exactly does "attract" look like?
The clinician and client collaborate, for example, on a controlled
drinking experiment; or a 'therapy with no medication plan'
or vice versa. Together we agree if that plan works, then we
continue the plan- i.e. if the substance use is in control or
the depression is lifting, then we continue the existing plan.
However, if the outcomes are poor, the substance use is still
causing problems, the depression is worsening, we must change
the plan in a positive direction. The client agrees to this.
What if it becomes clear the plan is actually not working, yet
the client still insists on doing the same unsuccessful strategies?
If the outcomes are not improving, the client is doing time
not treatment. This is the time to make a shift - either to
a "no treatment" monitoring/treatment plan or simply a "stopping
of treatment" plan.
A "no treatment" treatment plan means we are not pretending
to do treatment. We are merely monitoring the person for safety,
a person who may have a severe and persistent mental illness.
A "stopping of treatment" plan means that the client and clinician
agree to disagree, and therefore discontinue a treatment relationship.
For example, with mandated cases, we inform the referral source
we are no longer doing treatment. We believe continued use of
the same strategies - unsuccessful to this point- do not qualify
as active treatment. It is not useful, accurate and real feedback
for the client to be under the impression that doing time in
a program is doing treatment. The probation officer, judge,
employer or child protection worker would call the question.
It is their decision whether to invoke the consequences of non-
adherence to treatment.
The
bottom line is this. We are encouraging a collaborative
treatment plan to which the client agrees to adhere. It is not
a passive treatment plan or program with which the client will
comply, or else be asked to leave.
E.
Left against staff advice/AMA
This implies that the client had to 'vote' their dissatisfaction
with the treatment by signing out, possibly after a tug-of-war
with the staff. Should a client disagree with the plan and level
of care, it is the staff's responsibility to initiate a review
of the treatment plan with them. If you can design a new plan,
one the client agrees to adhere to, then implement that. It
may however involve a change in level of care or site of service.
What if no agreement can be reached with the client for a variety
of reasons? Maybe the client wants treatment which is unethical-
e.g. wanting large doses of methadone when objective signs indicate
over- sedation or over-medication. It could be a client wants
services beyond the mission of the program -e.g. the female
client who wants her teenage children living with her in the
program, when there is a necessary age limit for children. In
these cases, the client does not have to sign out and leave.
She has options. She can choose to continue services within
the ethics and mission of the program. Or she can choose no
further treatment at that agency where the services available
are mismatched with what she wants.
The appropriate Discharge category would then be: Chooses no further treatment; or Transferred to another site of care within the continuum of care; or Referred to another agency.
SKILLS
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I received the following request from Bill Bauer of Burlington,
Iowa:
"In the SKILLS section in Vol. 2 No. 10, last month on Q.1
on page 3 and Q.2 on page 4, you set up very practical examples
for your lesson. I wish you had gone one step further and set
out a treatment plan you would have used in each of those scenarios.
What would you consider an appropriate treatment plan? I recognize
from all you've written, it must be specific to the individual."
I get similar requests for more examples to help with documentation,
so here are some ideas. Keep in mind that the principle is to
have a treatment plan that speaks to the client and what they
want help with. It isn't about wordsmithing the perfect problem,
goal and treatment strategies.
Here are the questions to explore with the client before documenting
the plan.
-->What does the client want? To get her children back,
not serenity and sobriety or excellent parenting skills. She
may not even feel she has a drug or parenting problem. You then
join the client in helping her get her children back. What will
drive the plan is to prove to the child protection worker that
she does not have a drug or parenting problem.
--> How will we prove that she is a good parent with no drug
problem, and therefore fit to have her children back? Identify
with the client the life areas and behaviors that would show
her to be a responsible, non drug-using parent: a clean, safe
living situation for her with the children free of any negative
boyfriend relationships; adequate income derived from legal
and safe sources; consistent control of substance use; and parenting
skills to handle frustration, to exercise consistent discipline
and limit setting strategies etc. If, as the child protection
worker suspects, the client does indeed have a parenting problem
along with a substance use problem, then that will reveal itself
in poor outcomes of the service plan. If this is truly a collaborative
plan, she will clearly adhere to this to prove her point. If
it is your plan with which she must comply, don't be surprised
if she's not invested in it.
What
might that look like in a collaborative treatment plan?
Priority/ Problem #1: I want to show that I have full
control over my substance use.
Goal: Demonstrate consistent, stable drug- free functioning.
Strategies: 1. Random urine drug testing to build a track
record of consistent control of substance use.
2. Substance abuse group to share what leisure activities and
friends she has and get feedback on whether these will help
her control substance use or not.
Priority/
Problem #2: I believe I am a good parent with good child
raising and coping skills.
Goal: Apply parenting skills in a variety of situations
to strengthen and prove her parenting abilities.
Strategies: 1. Parenting skills group once a week to
identify difficult parenting situations and discuss which ones
she does well with and which ones need improvement.
2. Give several examples in her own family of how she applies
those skills already.
3. Practice in role plays some of these tough situations to
show how well she can handle them and/or get feedback on how
to improve.
Here
are some of the questions you ask yourself - your internal thought
processes- before you get to writing down the treatment plan.
--> What does the client want? The focus is on helping
the client to accumulate positive data that demonstrates her
adequate parenting skills and drug stability. If there is a
steady and consistent accumulation of data proving her adequate
parenting skills, it will shorten how often and for how long
the client will need to attend groups etc. If the data is trending
in the opposite direction, that makes it impossible to decrease
active involvement and attendance.
--> How will we prove that she is a good parent who has no
drug problem and is therefore fit to have her children back?
The various members of the team will monitor the progress of
the strategies in the treatment plan. The parenting skills group
leader will document to what degree the client is able to identify
what she is doing well, and which situations she finds more
challenging. If she is doing well at identifying and role-playing
parenting skills, we will develop an increasing database of
information that verifies she indeed is the good parent she
believes, supporting her desire to get her children back.
However, actions like not showing for the group, passive listening, non-participation, or failure to offer to group her examples of how she is applying this already in her family, will make it hard to remove the parenting skills group from her service plan. Or if the client has several positive urine drug screens, even misses the appointment to get tested, it provides data in the opposite direction of demonstrating stability and control of her substance use.
What might that look like in a collaborative treatment plan
subsequent to the initial plan?
Priority/
Problem #1: I am having trouble with positive urine results
and control of my substance use.
Goal: Regain control of my substance use and identify
what gets me off track.
Strategies: 1. Develop a log of when I use or have the
strongest urge to use to identify what situations are most difficult.
2. In Substance abuse group get ideas on how others cope with
the situation identified as most difficult.
Priority/
Problem #2: I am having trouble getting to groups consistently
and sharing what I do well and not so well as a parent.
Goal: Identify what is interfering with consistent attendance
and active participation about my parenting skills.
Strategies: 1. Review in an individual session what her
usual day looks like; what strategies would help her show she
is more responsible and reliable than it so far appears.
2. In Parenting skills group, be the first to speak up, so as
to practice putting her needs first rather than passively waiting
until an opening in the group process appears.
Bottom
Line
It is not the specific wording to obsess about. Perfect wording
is not what it's all about. It is about making the documentation
and treatment planning process a conversation about what is
important to the client, and how to get there from here. If
it is not a living treatment plan that engages the client and
strengthens the alliance, then it is just paperwork.
We need more peoplework-----not paperwork!
SOUL
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I won't quote the old thing about how few muscles it takes to smile versus how many muscles it takes to frown---- that is old stuff which might make you groan and frown. The other thing Seinfeld said that caught my attention was how much he enjoys what he does. I guess it is easier to enjoy that when he's not on a counselor's salary level. Nevertheless, his point was that a lot of people in show business get success, then complain about the paparazzi, or become mean and entitled. He does seem to enjoy what he does in a way that brings joy and smiles to a lot of us.
When the Seinfeld show first started, they had great difficulty convincing the higher ups that you could make a successful comedy show focused for 20 minutes on one subject like waiting in line at a Chinese restaurant. The conventional wisdom was that it wouldn't work. I'm glad Seinfeld et al persevered and believed in what they did. It has brightened the day for millions for years.
This all made me think about what I believe in, and how much I enjoy what I am doing. It also made me think about what action I need to take on anything I don't believe in or enjoy. I'll check my laughter meter on that to identify where to start. What are your numbers for today......400, 15 or 1?
STUMP THE SHRINK
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I know there is no firm common consensus on what the criteria are for prognosis in addictions treatment. But we are required to give one to keep referents happy and as a result we do give our best 'guesstimate' based on our experience. For example I worked case management with homeless alcoholics for several years. What I would consider a good or improving prognosis would appear fairly grim for someone exiting intensive outpatient. When I worked at an inpatient facility for a fairly affluent clientele, it obviously required you to dig deeper into their state of being assessing beyond their outward appearance and resources. Thus I have worked with 'winos' who were recovering with more success than millionaires. We can't be afraid to say what we see and admit how a person's treatment went. When someone is able to run out their resources while in treatment, what's wrong with saying just that - we couldn't help them and from our experience it doesn't look very good for them. We have explained to them why we believe this. As care providers our professional/personal knowledge base tends to revolve around the people we serve that we have known that for years. We need to learn to trust it. Are the courts, probation departments, lawyers and insurance companies willing to accept this?
My response
I agree that we need to be straight forward with prognosis. I would try to stay with reporting level of function however, not comments about their compliance with a program we have constructed.
For example, I might say: "The client achieved and maintained abstinence (if that was one of the agreed upon goals of treatment); and that we verified that with family and random urine testing etc. The client's methods to prevent further uncontrolled substance use and drug related problems have worked in the course of treatment here. S/he has achieved a level of stability and does not appear to be in immediate danger of continued problematic use. However, the client never achieved agreement that s/he had an addiction problem and believes that s/he will have no further trouble with legal problems. Prognosis is questionable as the client's methods for avoiding further drug-related problems long term have not usually been found to be effective in the population of people we have served previously."
I know this is long winded, but it seeks to explain what the client has achieved and puts the emphasis on function, not completing a program. Also it does not simply say "Poor Prognosis" without explaining the rationale.
Until Next Time
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Quick Links...