A discussion, chaired by broadcaster Edward
Stourton, showed panel members determined
to fight for the future of family services
against a backdrop of cuts
Martin Barnes
, chief executive, DrugScope
The welfare reform agenda is already having a devastating effect on some
families. Of 17 wellbeing board priorities, just one is related to drugs and
alcohol and there’s the threat of substantial reduction in funding.
Ian Duncan Smith’s report made depressing reading. We have a government
that will be neutralising the deficit, so services will get worse before they get
better. Families will have to move house and problems are closely tied with
losing ties with communities. So I’m very pessimistic about the direction of
travel. The Social Fund was flawed from the outset, but a safety net. For all its
faults, the fact that major safety net taken away stands out as particularly crass
in the social care agenda.
Vicky Maloney
, service manager, Early Break
The need to influence local commissioning is huge. I’m often met with ‘does
that tick an outcome box for me?’ We try and link with social care – it’s about
challenging and educating other services that are in contact with children.
We’re dependent on high threshold cases coming forward. It’s about a whole
family approach, including domestic violence and mental health. We need to
see families who are not in touch with any services.
Eric Appleby
, chief executive, Alcohol Concern
Alcohol’s always been the poor relation. One of the possible effects of changes
is that the playing field will be leveled up a bit.
We need places for families to go – and for them to know that places are
there. Many things prevent them from doing this, such as them thinking that
it’s normal and that they should cope. No one knows how to talk about drinking
– it’s either a joke or a real problem. Professionals will ask about all sorts of
things but find it very difficult to talk about alcohol. We talk about ‘binge
drinking young people’, because that’s not us.
Alan Hopley
, director of fundraising, marketing and
communications, Addaction
Not only will drugs and alcohol compete with obesity, smoking etc, but ring-
fencing will come off. So there won’t be a joined-up approach – it’ll depend on
personalities and local authorities.
Payment by Results (PbR) may mean a very quick turnaround; people in and
out of the door. These are the sorts of contracts we’re going to have to decide
whether or not to go for. We need to make successful services more successful
and let other stuff fall by the wayside. We have to work in different ways.
Carole Sharma
, chief executive, FDAP
We have a challenge in helping the treatment workforce to work differently from
how we’ve always worked. We need to train all staff involved – we’re still failing
to get the agenda into doctors’, schools etc. We’ve had a culture of targets – and
they can clear the mind and help you focus. But some people think if you don’t
have to do it, you can ignore it, so they don’t have a drug and alcohol service.
Lots of reforms are based on the fact that people are passionate about what
they do – but this doesn’t make it safe. I feel we’re going to have to start again
from grass roots.
Jan Tallis
, chief executive, School Home Support
We’re having to put more effort into showcasing our work. Last year we were
working in 250 schools – this year it’s 150. We lost five local authority contracts.
There’s no one else there for early interventions, asking the right questions.
School’s a brilliant place to start as it’s a non-stigmatising environment, but
teachers need to have drug and alcohol awareness. People are being required to
double their output for half the input – it’s scary. Services won’t be there that
we used to use for referrals.
Let
’
s talk
…
April 2012 |
drinkanddrugsnews
| 9
www.drinkanddrugsnews.com
Cover story |
Family support
‘Whoever you
talk to you’ll
get a different
view of what
family support
means.’
The panel, from left to right:
Alan Hopley, Vicky Maloney,
Eric Appleby, Edward Stourton,
Carole Sharma, Martin Barnes, Jan Tallis