Elements of community services scenarios
Ross Woods, 2009 rev. 2009
This is a range of variables used to generate scenarios for training purposes. It gives a situation and asks the student: "What would you do?" These variables relate primarily to crises faced by workers in Addiction Recovery, but many of them are relevant to other fields of community service. To some extent, it could be used to mix and match variables in a rigid prescriptive approach. However, its best use is as a stimulus to create more factors and fresh scenarios.
Give the basic information of the scenario
- Are you onsite or being phoned for help?
- When? (Time of day, day of week)
- Where? (Includes context)
- Who? (staff, residents, resident’s children, visitors, volunteers, bystanders)
- Doing what? What triggered it? What’s happened so far?
Normal range of relevant information
Relevant individual backgrounds:
- Residents: Name, gender, age, and temperament, how long/well you know them, mental health history
- Staff: Name, gender, age, temperament, and expertise (training and experience), how long/well you know them
Places may be:
- School
- Public place: roadside, outside house, alley, shops, courthouse, beach
- Inside the house, the footpath outside the_house
- Street drop-in centre
Resident was:
- victim
- instigator
- supporter of instigator
Temperament and moods may be:
- Selfish vs. Unselfish
- Calm, rational vs. Panicky, easily exasperated
- Enthusiastic, positive vs. naturally pessimistic
- Overly optimistic view of residents vs. overly pessimistic view of residents
- Confident vs. Insecure, low self-worth
- Tend to rush action vs. tends to delay action
- Patient vs. Short-tempered
- Initiative, creative vs. Poor initiative, not creative
- Very communicative vs. Non-communicative (either withdrawn or incoherent)
- Mature, insightful
- Easily afraid, withdrawing, shy
- Withdrawing, non-participatory
- Evasive vs. straightforward, bravado
- Argumentative, defensive
- Erratic
- Dishonest: manipulative
- Dishonest: self-protective
- Tough-guy
- Disengaged
- Rescuer
- Goody two shoes
- Resistor/rebellious
Group dynamics:
- Where are the cliques and power blocs?
- Who are the leaders? Who are the followers? Who is independent?
Kinds of emergency
- Government:
- Local politician shows up
- Police come regarding past activities of a resident
- Formal complaint from Department of Community Services
- Inexperienced Department of Community Services worker appears to panic and tries to withdraw all residents
- Letter arrives for court official to see resident
- Action of lone resident:
- Runaway
- Trying to meet drug dealer
- Tries to get new boyfriend
- Informs you she is pregnant
- Self-harm
- Suicide attempt
- Play on disability or race to get acceptance or special treatment
- Misuse of prescription drug
- Resident seemed intoxicated or high
- Loses temper, damages property
- Dramatic change of mood and/or social habits
- Wants to act against a court order (e.g. restraining order) Court Imposed Order (e.g. Community Based Order), Youth Supervision Order, Intensive Supervision Order.
- Breaks condition of bail
- Starts argument with a neighbor
- Starts argument with a landlord
- Starts argument with a shop owner
- Theft, embezzlement
- Resident tries to contact abusive ex-partner
- Altercations between residents:
- Bullying
- Argument with serious threat
- Fight
- Use of medication (either while in the program or as they come in):
- Refuses to take prescribed medication
- Hoards prescribed medication
- Hoards non-prescription medication
- Takes much more non-prescription medication that they admit
- Third party causes:
- Angry parent (who does not have custody) tries to take child
- Angry ex-partner (who does not have custody) tries to take a resident’s child
- Angry ex-partner threatens worker with physical harm
- Angry ex-partner tries to contact resident, despite a restraining order
- Angry parent (who does not have custody) shows up; wants compensation for a past incident (which may be real, imagined or exaggerated)
- Close relative/friend of resident suddenly dies. Distraught resident panics and wants to do something silly.
- Victim
- Road accident (staff-worker’s fault), called ambulance
- Road accident (senior resident’s fault), called ambulance
- Road accident (stranger’s fault), called ambulance
- Road accident (stranger’s fault), organization’s vehicle written off
- Resident is victim of serious assault, put in hospital
- Resident is victim of sexual assault
- Health
- Fainting/unconscious
- Sudden serious illness, appears life-threatening (e.g. acute appendicitis)
- Sudden death by natural causes (e.g. aneurysm)
- Other:
- Former resident seeks refuge from police
- Solicitor’s letter of “Intent to Sue” arrives for junior staff worker alleging negligence
- Worker finds forged prescriptions in a resident’s stuff
- Resident deals drugs
- Worker finds unidentifiable pills hidden a resident’s stuff
- You find a weapon in resident’s stuff
- Worker loses temper with resident and threatens kinds of disciplinary action that is:
- inappropriate in the situation, or
- not enforceable, or
- against policy.
Complicating variables
- Other people involved:
- Multiple staff
- Multiple residents
- Multiple emergencies
- Multiple victims
- Multiple third parties involved
- Disposition
- Is anything in particular causing or adding to the worker’s stress?
- Does fatigue play a role?
- What kind of person are you? How will that affect your interpretation of the situation?
- Weapons, or items that could be improvised weapons, are available in the immediate context.
- Staffing may be:
- short-staffed
- staffed with low-skilled people
- staffed with highly-skilled people but this is an area of weakness
- Is there any history (background antecedents or incidents) that precipitated or escalated it?
- Bad behavior could have been premeditated.
- Information:
- You have to make a decision based on incomplete information.
- Aspects of your information make the situation more complex, e.g. hearsay information.
- You have information from multiple equally reliable sources, but they radically conflict on key points.
- You have information from multiple sources, but the least reliable source is legally stronger.
- Procedures:
- Organizational procedures and relevant laws aren’t helpful.
- The worker did the right intervention according to procedures but it failed, making the situation worse.
- The worker did the wrong intervention but it failed, making the situation worse.
- Risk factors change drastically during intervention, e.g.:
- resident looked all right a while ago, but now stops breathing
- worker on site seems to lose balance in judgment (may be starting to panic or to lose control).
- All your main solutions are wrong or harmful to somebody. Do you just pick the lesser wrong? Can you divide the situation into separate problems that are more easily resolved?
Factors in the decision-making process
- How quickly do you need to make a decision?
- How accurate and complete is your information?
- What questions do you need to ask to get the information you need to make a decision?
- If physical safety of people is the top priority, what other things are also high priorities in this case?
- What legal implications could there be?
- What insurance implications could there be?
- What effects could there be to reputation of your organization?
- What costs would be incurred? Who would pay them afterwards?
- Does the board or director have any particular preferred style of response?
- Will you set a precedent that will have its own set of implications?
- What other kinds of risks?
- How would good Crew Resource Management (CRM) practices affect the way you handle it?
- Can the person be removed from the situation?
- Can the location be isolated? (e.g. a room that can be shut off) Is it lockable?