Research and Partnerships for Mental Health

The UMass, Dept. of Psychiatry’s Center for Mental Health Services Research printed a new issue brief written by Jodi Adams, MA, Joanne Nicholson, PhD, Susan Maciolek, MPP, Kate Biebel, PhD entitled, “Family Networks Implementation Study: Integrating Rigor and Relevance in Effective Research Partnerships” The new mental health law for children calls for more partnerships between providers/insurance companies to provide quality services for children with mental health needs. Research can be helpful but wasteful and redundant if nothing good comes out of it. Research can touch on certain topics of interest for critical thinking but it is worthless if other pertinent facts are not part of the equation. Read below my views on what I feel needs to be researched for practitioners in the "trenches" that directly impact our clients.

I would like the academic community to research on the outpatient clinical work for families who graduate from the Family Network Programs.For example, families who are involved with DCF tend to have higher no-shows than families not involved with DCF in outpatient counseling sessions. What are the reasons and causes for this high number of no-shows? If it is due to transportation issues, then what can be done about this? If the families are not motivated to want counseling anymore and have to go, then what are agencies supposed to do? I would like to see more reseach on the failure rate of families who just can't get back on their feet after terminating from the Family Networks Program. Maybe policy makers and Talking Heads can look at flagging families from the very beginning in identifying some parents who just incompetent and incapable of raising the child in their homes.



Isn't it ridiculous for DCF to continue take away children from some parents who have histories of drug abuse and domestic abuse and put them in foster care and not put them up for adoption? These parents don't learn anything when their kids are taken away. They tend to just make more children and become more entrenched in the broken child welfare system.



I would also like the academic community to do more research on low income families who attend counseling sessions and on Mass Health and not DCF. Here are some things for them to look at:

The high number of no-shows.

The turnover of clincians leaving the agency for other jobs that are not insurance dependent.

The relationship between families wanting to get on SSI and being committed to the therapy process.



Is their story on the same page as therapists who are there to work with them on their personal issues and not just for the SSI check?



It is amazing funds are being poured into research and not helping these agencies who need assistance to keep afloat. Researchers need to look at those agencies who have reduced staff; services; and have closed some of their other offices due to losing money. Children with mental health needs can't be served as a result.



Robbin MillerAdvocate/Private Practitioner

CANS Reflection Part II

As of now as I write this post, I have not received any information on how the CANS (Children and Adolescent Needs Strengths) information will be private and confidential on the "virtual gateway" under the new Children's Mental Health law in Massachusetts. However, I have one tidbit that concerns me. I don't understand why the CANS labels 18-21 years old as "adolescents," when they are in fact, adults. The only possible exception would probably be for those individuals with certain physical, cognitive or psychiatric disabilities who are deemed incompetent by the court and would need decisions to be made for them. I don't know if advocates for these groups would approve such a condescending label for this population.

(Please note, the term, "Jerry's Kid", is offensive for those individuals with muscular dystrophy (MD)over the age of 18 years old. Individuals with MD despise being called this term. There are many people in this population who are fully competent and productive citizens in society).

I am wondering what can be done to advocate that individuals over the age of 18 years be called adults and not "adolescents" under the CANS. Talking Heads needs to know that these adults can decline to take the CANS period! If they are competent and not a danger to themselves or others, nothing can be done to force someone to take the CANS.

What do you think?

Robbin Miller, LMHC
Facilitator
www.therapistsforchange.blogspot.com