Page last updated: Monday 7 April, 2008 5:05 PM

Do we need the Professionals?

 

What is the role of the RW today? - we all have different views. It would seem that many Local Authorities, and indeed charities, are no longer recruiting what we at rehabworker.co.uk would consider to be the 'traditional' RW - a person who provides training to people with a visual impairment and other organisations. The managers of Sensory Teams tend to look for 'care workers' - people who can pass on advice, arrange care packages and do the necessary paperwork - does this person need to be a 'trained' professional or an administrator?

Service provision has changed drastically over the last 5 years - Social Services are having to provide more and more services to an increased population with expanding needs. It really isn't hard to see why Sensory Services, never considered to be involved with 'sexy' disabilities even 20 years ago, have suffered. While those of us working in the field have accepted this as 'something you've gotta work with' it is now becoming almost insulting to those of us trained to provide rehabilitative input in the traditional sense.

Just recently, one local authority - and they are not alone - have preferred not to recruit a qualified RW but instead, take on two unqualified people as 'Rehab Assistants'. We believe this is not wholly unwise; it can provide much needed 'fast track' services to more people, free up valuable time for others in the team and get more people involved and interested in working in the field - if they are trained effectively. However, without any training in the function of the eye, psychological aspects of visual impairment, communication, rehabilitative skills training, motivational techniques and the rest, these two new additions to the team - who incidentally should not be blamed for the organisation's lack of vision (forgive the pun) - are expected to accurately assess the needs of someone who has lost or is losing their vision. They are expected to visit someone's home and formulate a package of 'care services' that will be a part of the person's life for perhaps many years.

Would you want this person to assess your grandmother, mother, sister or daughter? - we know it's not gender specific but you get what we mean.

There are many organisations providing services who claim to 'look at the individual 'holistically', or 'value the individual' - yet they are not actively demonstrating this, in fact, they are doing the exact opposite. Their main problem is ignorance, they do not understand sight loss, they do not understand rehabilitation - their only view of people with a sight loss is that they need 'looking after' - and they do not understand the training.

Many authorities have removed training budgets for Sensory staff claiming they cannot afford it. The real irony is that spending a few thousand pounds on training today will save millions of pounds of taxpayers money over the next five years.

Some authorities are buying in training services for Orientation & Mobility, Communications or Daily Living via agencies or free-lance workers - often at prices way above what it would cost to train their own staff. OK, this does come from another budget and is fine while it lasts and if you live in an area that does this - what if you don't? It would appear we've reached the stage of 'post code lottery' concerning services for people with a sight loss yet no-one is shouting about it. Where are the RNIB? Where are Guidedogs? Where are AFB?.

We believe this 'dumbing down' of professional services to people with a sight loss is an atrocity - it would never happen to such a degree in other services. Perhaps it's because most people with a sight loss are over 65 - is it yet another example of ageism?