| Martin Thain |
The use of physical interventions in any context other than as a last resort method of preventing harm is disempowering and damaging to both service users and staff. Workable alternatives do exist, and as a Proact SCIPr instructor I am committed to promoting and supporting proactive practice which is based on understanding behaviour and dealing with the reasons behind the behaviour. Prone restraints are extreme, unnecessary, and ineffective. If someone used one on me I would call it assault. Should this really be any different for a service user? |
| Andy Erskine |
As a qualified PROACT-SCIPr Instructor I believe there are valid alternatives to physical interventions. I could never countenance using a prone restriant on anyone. |
| Alex Gooderham |
i firmly believe in the charter. having worked with children and adults with autism for the past 13 years i have seen the need to change and adapt and develop positive and proactive approaches for people young and old in care with the dignity that is their right. |
| Caroline White |
I have supported people with Learning Disabilities in a variety of settings over the last 24 years. At no time has the need for prone restraint been evident and the horrors of such practice and that such practice continues today is shocking. I wish you every success in your task and thank you for raising this important issue. |
| Suzette Farrelly |
i BELIEVE THAT 'PRONE' RESTRAIN SHOULD BE BANNED. tHERE ARE MAY OTHER WAYS TO DELA WITH CHALLENGING BEHAVIOUR AND THE LACK OF TRAINING IN EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION AND OTHER METHODS OF DISPERSING THIS TYPE OF BEHAVIOUR HAS ALLOWED OTHER METHODS OF RESTRAINT TO CONTINUE. THERE IS SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE BAN AND THE NUMBER OF DEATHS AND INJURIES IS UNACCEPTABLE WHEN WE SHOULD BE CARING - NOT HURTING. |
| carl bird |
About time something is done to abolish such practices. |
| Marissa Varley |
Love Life, Love yourself and others, STOP ABUSE. |
| Phil Barker |
This represents an important, small step towards addressing the question why containment and coercion continue to be such an important part of so-called 'mental health, disability and other 'caring' services. Banning the use of 'prone restraint' must only be a necessary 'first step'. |
| Piers Allott |
I have been promoting the concept and practice of mental health recovery for some 12 years now and coercion in all its forms flies in the face of recovery. In the words of the NIMHE Guiding Statement on Recovery "Recovery is not just about what services do to or for people. Rather, recovery is what people experience themselves as they become empowered to manage their lives in a manner that allows them to achieve a fulfilling, meaningful life and a contributing positive sense of belonging in their communities." We need to think positively, value difference and find ways of collaborating as oposed to coercing and enable healing in people experiencing distress rather than causing more pain.
At the Scottish Recovery Network Conference on 1st December I heard Gene Johnson from Meta Services in the US say that in 2000 they decided to put an end to all restraint and all seclusion in their inpatient units. It can be done. Lets do it. |
| Jim O'Dwyer |
I welcome the Charter and I hope it will succeed in achieving its aims.
Jim O'Dwyer
AEGIS Protective Services |
| Becky Cooper |
Reading some of the articles has been very emotional for me. The way that these people have been treated is very disturbing. We need to learn from this and treat people with dignity and respect. Any form of restraint must be a last resort and staff must be trained in approved methods of reasonable restraint in a crisis situation, but also primarily in low arosal techniques to prevent these situations getting to crisis level in the first place. |
| Bernadette Adams |
I fully support this Charter. I am totally against physical restraint. This has been allowed for far too long. It has to stop and rights, dignity and respect need to be upheld. |