Sharanya Mahesh, Jerry Tew, Mary Mitchell, Kar-Man Au, Vicky Nicholls, Abyd Quinn Aziz, Miranda Johnson, T K Vincent
{"title":"What is Family and Group Conferencing for adults? Part 1: Characterising the model and methods of enquiry.","authors":"Sharanya Mahesh, Jerry Tew, Mary Mitchell, Kar-Man Au, Vicky Nicholls, Abyd Quinn Aziz, Miranda Johnson, T K Vincent","doi":"10.3310/nihropenres.13811.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Family and Group Conferencing (FGC) is a relatively new strengths-based approach applied to adults needing social care and mental health support in the UK. Although the approach is well established in children's services in the UK, few services currently offer FGCs to adults; therefore, there is limited evidence regarding FGCs in the adult services context in the UK. This study aims to fill this gap by examining how FGCs work and what differences they can make in people's lives.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This paper (Part 1) addresses the first of two related research questions, aiming to characterize the practice model(s) that pertain to the context of adults' FGCs as currently offered. We employed a mixed methods research design drawing on data from both, previous literature as well as current practice by undertaking a comprehensive literature review, national survey and stakeholder interviews with current services and a deliberative forum involving a range of stakeholders pertaining to adult FGCs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Although there is some variation in the practice model(s) offered by services, the overall approach is underpinned by a relatively consistent set of values and principles, although these are often implicit. The FGC offers a staged approach that enables people and their networks to take greater control over their support arrangements. It is seen as an appropriate service offer across all adults and mental health services with the potential to result in a range of positive outcomes (as will be discussed in Part 2).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Central to achieving this is flexibility within the service offer to accommodate the social and cultural needs of the individual and their network, the independence of the FGC coordinator, the necessity of sufficient preparation for all participants, and rapport building in advance of the Conference.</p>","PeriodicalId":74312,"journal":{"name":"NIHR open research","volume":"5 ","pages":"20"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12198747/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NIHR open research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3310/nihropenres.13811.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Family and Group Conferencing (FGC) is a relatively new strengths-based approach applied to adults needing social care and mental health support in the UK. Although the approach is well established in children's services in the UK, few services currently offer FGCs to adults; therefore, there is limited evidence regarding FGCs in the adult services context in the UK. This study aims to fill this gap by examining how FGCs work and what differences they can make in people's lives.
Methods: This paper (Part 1) addresses the first of two related research questions, aiming to characterize the practice model(s) that pertain to the context of adults' FGCs as currently offered. We employed a mixed methods research design drawing on data from both, previous literature as well as current practice by undertaking a comprehensive literature review, national survey and stakeholder interviews with current services and a deliberative forum involving a range of stakeholders pertaining to adult FGCs.
Results: Although there is some variation in the practice model(s) offered by services, the overall approach is underpinned by a relatively consistent set of values and principles, although these are often implicit. The FGC offers a staged approach that enables people and their networks to take greater control over their support arrangements. It is seen as an appropriate service offer across all adults and mental health services with the potential to result in a range of positive outcomes (as will be discussed in Part 2).
Conclusion: Central to achieving this is flexibility within the service offer to accommodate the social and cultural needs of the individual and their network, the independence of the FGC coordinator, the necessity of sufficient preparation for all participants, and rapport building in advance of the Conference.