Forum > Welfare Rights

The three conversations model

(1/4) > >>

Fiz:
The three conversations is fast becoming the go-to model of needs assessments for care and support and hey ho it's not about providing care, it's about saving the country money.


https://www.scie.org.uk/future-of-care/asset-based-places/case-studies/three-conversations

A relative has their 100 year old mil living in an annex to their home and adult services have refused care support when my relative had a radical mastectomy and more recently surgery for bowel cancer based on the fact that her DH is there. Who's not able to care for his mother. It absolutely shocks me.

lankou:

--- Quote from: Fiz on 23 Sep 2021 11:57AM ---The three conversations is fast becoming the go-to model of needs assessments for care and support and hey ho it's not about providing care, it's about saving the country money.


https://www.scie.org.uk/future-of-care/asset-based-places/case-studies/three-conversations

A relative has their 100 year old mil living in an annex to their home and adult services have refused care support when my relative had a radical mastectomy and more recently surgery for bowel cancer based on the fact that her DH is there. Who's not able to care for his mother. It absolutely shocks me.

--- End quote ---


What is the "three conversations" model?

Sunny Clouds:
It's the current in-thing in social work assessments.  The government promotes it.

Basically the three 'conversations' are (copied & pasted) -

Conversation 1: “How can I connect you to the things that will help you get on with your life – based on your assets, strengths and those of your family and neighbourhood. What do you want to do? What can I connect you to?”

Conversation 2: “When people are at risk what needs to change to make you safe and regain control? How do I make that happen? What offers do I have at my disposal, including small amounts of money and using my knowledge of the community to support you? How can I pull them together in an ‘emergency plan’ and stick with (like glue) to make sure it works?”

Conversation 3: “What is a fair personal budget and where do the sources of funding come from? What does a good life look like? How can I help you use your resources to support your chosen life? Who do you want to be involved in good support planning?”

(edited for minor typo)

Sunny Clouds:
I hadn't heard about it before this thread and went away and looked it up.  There's some criticism of it out there, including by social workers, not least because of the jargon.

E.g. if you're a social worker, are you actually supposed to say "How can I connect you to...?"  What will the person needing help understand by being 'connected to'?  If not, why use that word in the model?

If I've read Fiz right, she's commenting on the emphasis in the model on money.

Personally, I think that's one aspect of the model that's a logical part, but I don't think they need three conversations.  One would be quicker.  "I've got next to no money in my budget to help you with, just lots of  jargon, so is there anything you need help with that I can find some non-state help for or encourage you to find non-state help for?"

At least it's not quite as bad as the SIM model of dealing with people with mental distress seen by the emergency services as a pain in the neck - roughly summarised, it's "Get the police to divert them away from health services and send them home."  But that's going out of favour slightly since various health professionals including A&E doctors got uppity about it.

Come to think of it, though, it's not really different, it's just SIM = "No, we won't help, you're a nuisance, now bog off" and 3C = "We've no money and can't help, so here's some jargon instead, now bog off."

(edited to tidy/shorten)

Sunny Clouds:
Of course my views above are my interpretation from the outside.  My guess is that Fiz has just had this annoying twaddle thrown at her.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version