by Cath Irvine
Perhaps my name is familiar to you as one of the administrators of the Intensive Interaction website. And maybe a few of you have wondered who I am and what I get up to in terms of Intensive Interaction (I.I). Well let me explain...
My official title is a specialist speech and language therapist (SLT). My last full time long-term job was in Somerset where I was involved in setting up I.I. in services for adults with learning disabilities (LD). Part of my role was to teach social services staff how to use and teach I.I. (*1). After nine years I had basically done myself out of a job so I looked around for something else to challenge me. The following account is about my last 20 months and the challenges that I was looking for... in Eastern Europe, Oldham and Brighton.
Many of us remember the scenes of Romanian orphanages in the mid-nineties. These scenes of deprivation had stayed with me for years. I promised myself I would do something for children in Eastern Europe when I was free to do so. Now was the time. With a charity called Hope and Homes for Children (*2) I headed out to an impoverished and politically unstable area of Moldova. I was working with 49 girls and young women who had just come out of a horrendous institution. I could do a whole article on this. I could rant for hours to anyone who will listen but I am going to resist this temptation. The work was hard but the results were rewarding and heart-warming. The political situation made life increasingly difficult and instead of the 6 months I’d planned, 2 months into our stay we were advised to return home by the British Embassy.
Returning home was a shock – I was left with nothing to do. I was utterly frustrated. Fortunately, Alison Matthews the SLT manager for Oldham adult LD service learned about my availability and organised a 2-month short-term contract to begin the process of setting up sustainable and systemic approaches to using I.I.
We began by meeting managers – doing a presentation of I.I. and discussing the challenges. The policies, the resources, the people, the systems. In particular we had to address the issues of physical touch and consent to video. The old hot potato of age appropriacy was not a difficult issue as it had already been addressed through the person centred planning discussions. We agreed resource funding and release for staff to undertake the training.
I got to know the service users for whom I.I. would be appropriate and did a weeks training for the people who Alison had identified as potential coordinators. We needed to ensure they were excellent practitioners and confident in the use of I.I.
Interestingly, some staff had come across II previously from a visiting consultant and there were some misconceptions and pockets of resistance around. Closer discussion revealled that some people had come across what Mel Nind describes as a ‘hybrid’ version (*3) of II where they had been told most dogmatically that they must do strict imitation rather than sensitive and relaxed mirroring. Once the non-hybrid use of II had been demonstrated and discussed most staff relaxed. However, this situation left me uneasy about how II can be so misrepresented. One of the joys of II is that it chimes with people’s natural behaviour. The hybrid version had been putting people under pressure to perform correctly rather than giving them permission to behave naturally. By the end of the first phase everyone was happy with II and individuals were making good progress. The management were so impressed that they agreed the purchase of 7 video cameras. Bonus!
When my 2 months was over and I headed back out to Eastern Europe. The coordinators were to continue their work with one individual each – compiling a case study including video footage to demonstrate progress over time.
Revisiting the girls in Eastern Europe was exciting. Many had made significant progress to the point where the pure form of II was no longer necessary and other elements of play and communication support could begin. This visit was for 2 months and then I returned to Oldham for the next phase of II input.
This phase was about reviewing the case studies, compiling a video montage to use on training courses and teaching the coordinators to teach II. After their initial training they co-facilitated 4 courses with me – taking increasing responsibility for the content. This whole process resulted in 28 one-day II courses being on offer and around 300 people attending training. A real blitz!
At the end of this period I was again due to go back to Eastern Europe when it was cancelled at the last minute (politics again!). With the help of a locum agency I filled my time by accepting a post in Brighton where II was known of but not used. The post was as a general LD therapist and I rather enjoyed the mixture of work that this involved. Amongst that mixture I was also using II. Staff began to get really interested in it and my name was already familiar in relation to II to the behavioural support team. They began to send staff and referrals my way. The buzz was out and we made plans for me to return to Brighton a few months later to do some training and intensive support.
My next period of time in Oldham was to help the coordinators spread their influence in supporting staff groups and families in independent use of II. For many people, attendance on a one-day course doesn’t fully prepare them for using II in the work place or home so the coordinators role was to expand to give post-course support.
Then back to Brighton – another place and a different model of support. Wherever I’m working the implementation of II needs to fit in with the way in which services are offered. We formed a multi-disciplinary II steering group and plotted our course. The steering group would take responsibility for thrashing out the support policies, consent issues and resources.
One-day training courses were offered to specific staff teams for whom II would be appropriate. Following the courses I would visit these teams to support the use of II by role modelling, videoing interactions with staff and giving feedback. Part of this process would also be to identify good practitioners who would be good in a coordinator role. I will be back in Brighton to deliver coordinator training and support to 8 staff during January/ February 2007
The end of 2006 saw me back in Oldham, setting up an Interactive Café (idea pinched from Leeds!) and giving the coordinators any necessary support they need.
Slotted between Eastern Europe, Oldham and Brighton I’ve also done training for other teams – always with the proviso that we have a follow-up day to review video and ensure supporting policies are in place.
I have been unable to return to Eastern Europe during 2006 but hopefully next year...
*1. Chapter 6 in Interaction in Action. Hewett & Nind
*3. Mel Nind’s keynote speech. Leeds conference 2006
Printed from www.intensiveinteraction.co.uk on Friday, 9th May 2008
For further information on Dave Hewett visit www.davehewett.com
Web site designed and developed by Designition Ltd