Page
  1. 1
    1
  2. 2
    2
  3. 3
    3
  4. 4
    4
  5. 5
    5
  6. 6
    6
  7. 7
    7
  8. 8
    8
  9. 9
    9
  10. 10
    10
  11. 11
    11
  12. 12
    12
  13. 13
    13
  14. 14
    14

Reflect on the work of the study group presentation and your contribution to it

Extracts from this essay...

Introduction

Describe and discuss interprofessional issues in the case scenario, including the issue of collaboration with users and carers. To answer this question fully, firstly there will be clear definitions of interprofessional practice and then a clear and coherent argument through-out the rest of this essay. "Interprofessional is collaboration between professionals, who may not share a common professional education, values, socialization, identity and experience" (Interprofessional Collaboration 2005: 6). "....occasions when two or more professionals learn together with the object of cultivating collaborative practice" (CAIPE 1997). Professionals collaborating and working interprofessionally benefits not only the professionals, but also users and carers. It can allow and help agencies to: * Have a shared professional competence and experience. * Deliver co-ordinated packages of services to individuals. * Tackle complex problems that cross traditional agency boundaries. * A better and increased use of resources. * Align services provided by all partners with needs of service users. * Stimulate more creative approaches to problems. (Taylor 2005: 4) The professionals within this case scenario attempted to work collaboratively and gain these advantages. However, there were a number of contributory factors (barriers) which restrained them from doing so. The key contributory factor was communication. Communication is key and essential to interprofessional practice. It may have benefited the professionals in the case scenario even by them just giving a basic knowledge of their own profession, as it provides a framework for communication which can increase professional involvement, and can save repetition of actions and tasks. This then leads onto an improvement in the service given to users and carers. Subsequently, within the case scenario it was identified that there was basic communication, but was little and ineffective. There was no clear, coherent information given, but rather a rough sketch of what was believed Joe Jacob's needed, without an explanation. "The referral from the hospital asks the Community Mental Health Team (CMHT) to support Joe when he is discharged from hospital in a week or so".

Middle

The hospital exerts power upon Joe, the CMHT and others concerned manipulating them to see Joe's discharge as desirable. Lukes shows that power is not just at one level and it can be exerted by people and over people whether they are aware of it or not. The hospital exerts all three dimensions of power over the CMHT. Ultimately, and most importantly, this does not create the best provisions for Joe Jacob's. The issue of power links in with research by Vanclay in 1996 when he considered collaboration between GPs and social workers. Power is dangerous to interprofessional practice, but it can also sustain it. Vanclay claimed that collaboration is sustained by similar factors to those important for first developing collaboration, namely: * understanding of roles and responsibilities; * sharing information about structures and procedures; * regular face to face contact, named link social workers, joint working on local projects or specific topics; * and support from senior management. Factors that were seen as threatening sustained collaboration were: * Rapid changes and conflicting organisational priorities; * Dependence on key individuals already committed to collaboration; * Lack of clarity or defined lead responsibility for ensuring collaborative development process is sustained; * Lack of responsibility for ensuring ongoing funding. (Vanclay, 1996, p. 28) The main interprofessional issue in the case scenario identified, was communication. According to Gregson et al. (1993) there are five collaborative gradings of communication which he identified in his research. This helps understanding of the communication difficulties in the case scenario. According to Gregson (1993) the professionals in the case scenario would be at stage one, where there is no direct communication. The professionals working interprofessionally in the case scenario did not meet-up together, which is the main theme of interprofessional working, and also they did not talk or write sufficiently to one another. Gregson et al. (1993) would see this as the lowest communication grading any interprofessional team can acquire.

Conclusion

There were some very strong personalities in the group which I was not used to, and I found this extremely hard to adjust. Also with the strong personalities, came this sense of power. I believe when people enter any type of group setting we are all equal. I found that within this group process, people believed they had power over certain members. This has inevitably taught me, to stand back and assess the situation first. Not to go in with this pre-conceived idea, that everyone will be thinking and feeling how I am. I think that I put a lot of time and effort into the group presentation, but did not show this at all times. This caused conflict in the end, as it was assumed I had not contributed enough. I have now learnt that showing what you have researched and any vital information towards the presentations of a group cannot be viewed as negative. I have found that there are certain negative ideas I have to address before I enter my new group process surrounding my shyness, quietness and inability to speak-up. I have also learnt that group work is a team process. It takes all individuals to put in the same time, effort and commitment. A team cannot run without any negotiating and communication skills. I ended up working independently as I felt I was pushed off from the whole group process due to my inability to address certain issues I had. In the end, I found out when it was too late, that if you have a issue its best to bring it up straight away, rather then allowing it to affect the way in which you work. Overall, the group process was a success. My overall contribution was a success also. I performed and delivered when it was necessary, which can be viewed as a negative, as I may have made people feel uneasy, but also as a positive as I came through in the end.

The above preview is unformatted text

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • Over 150,000 essays available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Over 180,000 student essays
  • Every subject and level covered
  • Thousands of essays marked by teachers
  • Over 180,000 essays
    written by students
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to write
    your own great essays

Marked by a teacher

This essay has been marked by one of our great teachers. You can read the full teachers notes when you download the essay.

Peer reviewed

This essay has been reviewed by one of our specialist student essay reviewing squad. Read the full review on the essay page.

Peer reviewed

This essay has been reviewed by one of our specialist student essay reviewing squad. Read the full review under the essay preview on this page.