Its hard not to punish

[ged]

I guess that most people browing this forum will be singing from the same songbook, in their approaches to work. I assume that we don't punish, and that keeping our clients safe is of paramount importance.

So what happens when these points come into conflict? Lets say Fred is using his CD's and their cases to self harm. They need to be removed for his safety. How do you make this not look like punishment?

I could try to explain that it is for his own safety until I'm blue in the face, but if it is perceived as punishment, then that is what it is.

So far I've come up with: Offer him the chance to listen to them whenever he likes, but with staff escorts (within staff constraints). They could even leave the room, if they took the case with them, and kept an ear out in case the music stopped.

This helps out if he simply misses the sounds, but most people would miss not having their possessions under their control. I can't think of anyway to take his cds off him (or at lease prevent him from using them for SIB), without taking them off him!

By the way, this is not a current concern, but a conundrum faced in the past. It could equally be around taking someone out on a social trip when they still seem close to boiling over. You don't want to deny them a much longed for activity, but the risks involved are too great to take, for the person in question, the staff escort, and the public.

Just trying to get the board rolling again!

Ged

[forumAdmin]

what happens when these points come into conflict? Lets say Fred is using his CD's and their cases to self harm. They need to be removed for his safety. How do you make this not look like punishment?

So far I've come up with: Offer him the chance to listen to them whenever he likes, but with staff escorts (within staff constraints). They could even leave the room, if they took the case with them, and kept an ear out in case the music stopped.

Just trying to get the board rolling again!
Ged

I think if it is only an issue about the music (and I do take on board that it may not be) I would consider moving the music to a solid state music system. A number of CD's could be converted to MP3's and put on a card in a cheap player. This would mean hundreds of songs with no CD's.

Change of this sort for most people will be a problem and I do not believe this is a complete solution by any means
We would do a lot of work around the individual as there are bound to be reasons for the SIB and emotional attachment to the CD cases (as you mentioned).

I look forward to others views...
Thank you for coming up with a good situation to discuss.

forumAdmin
p.s. I first read your location as South America although I trust the west country is still sunny?

[ged]

forumAdmin
p.s. I first read your location as South America although I trust the west country is still sunny?

Everyday is glorious down here

[andy]

This is an interesting example. What you appear to describe is a risk reduction strategy that involves the removal nof something pleasant for the individual. If the person is inflicting serious harm with these items what is to stop using other items in the future?

I think the removal of a sharp object such as a knife would be generally considered to be reasonable, if there was a real risk of harm with the CD's then removal could occur provided that person still had access to the music.

I also think the paramountcy principle of the Human Rights Act is also relevant here.