This assignment will critically analyze two illustrations of interprofessional and interagency pattern utilizing illustrations from my current pattern arrangement. Relevant literature will be used to place what factors support or constrain interprofessional and interagency coaction ( IPIAC ) . IPIAC is frequently described as a holistic attack to an person ‘s demands. When used efficaciously, a holistic attack allows for better service bringing to the service user. Hammick et Al ( 2009, p.10 ) states that being interprofessional is “ larning and working or working and larning with others as appropriate, when necessary and sometimes both ” . Interagency working dressed ores “ more on the organizational functions and duties of those involved in coaction ” ( hypertext transfer protocol: //www.scie.org.uk ) . Interprofessional is relationships between persons and interagency is relationships between administrations.
IPIAC was a modernization docket introduced in public policy by the New Labour Government. Government acknowledgment suggests that many societal jobs can non be efficaciously addressed by any given administration moving in isolation from others. That is, when professionals work together efficaciously they provide a better service to the complex demands of the most vulnerable people in society. New Labour besides specified that there was a ‘Berlin Wall ‘ type division between bureaus and professionals and that there was a barrier to co-operation and this barrier should be confronted so that services worked in partnership with service users. However harmonizing to research conducted by Hiscock and Pearson ( 2002, p.11 ) “ several authorities studies have criticised the deficiency of coordination between wellness and societal services in the community ” . So, in kernel when professions work collaboratively the service user gets a better trade. “ Willing engagement ” ( Henneman et al, 1995, cited in Barrett et Al, 2005, p.19 ) and a “ high degree of motive ” ( Molyneux, 2001, cited in Barrett et Al, p.19 ) have been stated as critical facets of effectual IPIAC.
My current pattern arrangement is within a voluntary administration in a domestic maltreatment service. I am a undertaking worker at a Refuge for adult females and kids who are get awaying domestic maltreatment. My function is to co-link work with lasting Refuge staff and co-ordinate each service users support demands whilst keeping links with appropriate statutory and voluntary sectors.
INTERPROFESSIONAL PRACTICE ONE
The first illustration of IPIAC to be discussed and analysed within my pattern arrangement will be a hebdomadal meeting held between Refuge staff, wellness visitants and the play-worker from Women ‘s Aid. The purpose and intent of these meetings is to portion information so that identified demands of the households in the Refuge can be addressed and where possible be signposted to other services as required. The meetings are designed for professionals to portion information and cognition about the household ‘s lives but non do determinations on their behalf ( except where there are child protection issues ) . The meetings besides aim to supply support to households harmonizing to appraisal of demand utilizing professional opinion. Within these meetings everyone discusses and communicates the personal development and advancement of the adult females and kids in the Refuge so that all professions involved are kept up to day of the month with the household ‘s fortunes and state of affairs. This supports IPIAC and is effectual in that it is a opportunity for everyone involved to derive farther advice and counsel from other professionals in relation to their current degree of engagement with the households. This in bend supports the households and assists them with their hereafter ends and programs. However these meetings could be interpreted to some as ‘secretive ‘ as they are held behind closed doors and it is a meeting in which the households are non involved in. This could be construed as an ‘expert power relationship ‘ to some ( Maclean and Harrison, 2011, p.31 ) .
For IPIAC and these meetings to be effectual it is critical that all professionals involved support one another and are non be seen as self-interested or see themselves as higher than another profession. This is when jobs occur as there is non a logical distribution of power. “ Unequal power distribution can be oppressive ” ( Payne, 2000, cited in Barrett et Al, 2005, p.23 ) and can restrict engagement for some professionals. Power in IPIAC should be shared and distributed and no hierarchy of power should be. If some professionals see themselves as more powerful than another they are non run intoing the demands of the service user. Sharing of information and cognition about the households in the Refuge is the intent of these hebdomadal meetings so as to accomplish the best possible result for the service user.
A restraint of IPIAC is that some professionals are territorial and do non like to portion information and cognition. Molyneux ( 2001, cited in Barrett et Al, 2005, p20 ) “ found that professionals who were confident in their ain function were able to work flexibly across professional boundaries without experiencing covetous or threatened ” . “ Professional maturity ” was an look used by Laidler ( 1991, cited in Barrett et Al, 2005, p.20 ) to depict professionals who were confident in their ain function to portion information and communicate efficaciously with other professionals. These professionals do non experience territorial about releasing their cognition and apprehension to farther enhance good IPIAC. Stapleton ( 1998, cited in Barrett et Al, 2005, p.20 ) suggests that “ a combination of personal and professional assurance enables persons to asseverate their ain positions and dispute the point of views of others ” .
Active hearing is an of import accomplishment to keep in order to accomplish effectual IPIAC. To be able to recognize and react to what is being communicated is cardinal. Professionals working collaboratively should be able to show this verbally and nonverbally to each other. This is greatly helped if all concerned put aside the typical stereotyping of each other ‘s professions in order to hear and listen to what is being said. Effective unfastened and honest communicating is critical and likely one of the most of import facets of IPIAC. It requires professionals to take into history each other ‘s positions, be respectful, dignified and to listen to each other without being extremely critical of one another. Constructive feedback about the household needs to be undertaken aboard constructive suggestions and encouragement and should take topographic point at a clip when other professionals are receptive. However, being receptive to what is being said does non ever occur during these meetings. At times, one professional does non wish what another is conveying and this can make struggle within the professions. However the demand here is to retrieve that it is the service user that is cardinal to the procedure and that the end is to accomplish the best result for them and their household.
There are elements within this illustration that both support and constrain IPIAC. To accomplish the end and non ensue in a hapless result for the service user it is of import for all professionals involved to pass on candidly and openly and for at that place to non be a important power instability between the professions.
INTERPROFESSIONAL PRACTICE TWO
The 2nd illustration of IPIAC to be discussed and analysed within my pattern arrangement will be a Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conference ( MARAC ) . A member of the Refuge staff attends these meetings on a biweekly footing. A MARAC meeting is a community response to domestic maltreatment. Cases are referred to a MARAC by the Refuge as a consequence of finishing a CAADA-DASH hazard designation checklist ( RIC ) ( see appendix one ) with the victim of the domestic maltreatment. This checklist determines the victim ‘s degree of risk/need. If the hazard designation mark is 14 or more on the RIC, the MARAC threshold for high-risk has been meet and a referral to a MARAC meeting is made. Cases can besides be referred to the MARAC either as a consequence of a high hazard domestic crime/incident recorded by the constabulary or by a direct referral from a take parting bureau. Participating bureaus go toing the meetings can include representatives of statutory services such as the constabulary, condemnable justness, wellness, kid protection, lodging practicians and Independent Domestic Violence Advocates ( IDVA ‘s ) . The intent of the meetings is for professionals to implement a hazard direction program that provides professional support to all those at hazard and which reduces the hazard of injury. The purpose is so to bring forth a safety program for each victim of domestic maltreatment.
The MARAC ‘s purpose is to portion information to increase the safety, wellness and wellbeing of victims/survivors of domestic maltreatment. They can find whether the alleged culprit poses a important hazard to any peculiar person or to the general community. Harmonizing to Bowen ( 2011, chapter 5. ) “ MARAC maps through meetings designed to ease multi-agency information sharing, with a position to implementing an agreed-upon hazard direction and victim safety program ” . Effective communicating and information sharing supports IPIAC as it can help to construct relationships between bureaus across a much broader scope. A MARAC with effectual communicating and information sharing between bureaus can besides advance IPIAC in developing much stronger relationships between the voluntary and statutory sector. Barrett et EL ( 2008, p.21 ) states that “ communicating competency contributes to effectual interprofessional working and enables those involved to joint their ain positions, listen to the positions of others and negotiate results ” . An effectual MARAC meeting which supports IPIAC is when professionals work collaboratively to guarantee that victims/survivors and/or their kids are safeguarded from farther maltreatment. The authorities ‘s action program “ Name to End All Violence Against Women and Girls ” states that “ we all have to work together to accomplish our end of stoping force against adult females and misss. It is non a undertaking for cardinal authorities entirely ” . It suggests that bureaus need to work together to run into the demands of their local communities and that bureaus are held accountable.
However, a restraint of a MARAC meeting that I witnessed was that non all professionals brought the appropriate information to the meetings which lead to an inefficiency and hold of the instance which frustrated others professionals go toing. Poor timekeeping was another avenue that at times would thwart other professionals go toing the meetings. This seemed to estrange them as I would hear remarks such as “ we are all professionals here and should move as such ” and “ as professionals go toing of import meetings like this, we should ever endeavor to be on clip ” . I besides found at the MARAC that some bureaus merely had snippings of information that on their ain did non raise any peculiar concern. It was merely when the saber saw of information was pieced together that the hazard factors could get down to be understood.
This illustration shows that when MARAC meetings support and strengthen interagency working and is effectual, it is IPIAC at its best. This attack to working more collaboratively is good as all administrations are coming together for the intent of a common end, with that end being the best possible result for the service user. However some of the MARAC meetings that I had attended were non ever that effectual due to the fact that non all cardinal bureaus or administrations attended the meetings when required to make so or did non hold the appropriate information to manus. It is good that all bureaus have every bit much information to manus as possible to ease IPIAC and have a profound positive impact on the result for the service user.
In decision, IPIAC has many elements and all these different elements require that the different professions adopt them so that effectual results are achieved for the service user. Although IPIAC has been around for many old ages and is non new, it still needs to be continued, developed and incorporated into the day-to-day work of all professions. When administrations and professions from different subjects genuinely understand each other ‘s functions, duties and challenges, the potency of IPIAC could be to the full realised and many of the barriers alleviated. This in bend will lend to a more successful result to the service user which of class is cardinal to effectual IPIAC. If IPIAC is uneffective it can restrict pick for the service user and besides addition hazard.
Word Count: 1966