and reach thousands of daily visitors
8 SEPTEMBER 2008
NO 1345
The therapeutic community
The idea at the heart of the therapeutic community model is one of equality between people and of the capacity in each of us to help and heal each other and to contribute to each other's development. This model is an appropriate one (although not the only one) upon which to base therapeutic work in a group care setting, because it is a model in which the connections between individual work and the context of that work have been productively thought about and it seems to offer an approach that can be adapted for different settings according to the needs and abilities locally. I will start this chapter, therefore, by outlining some aspects of this model, especially as it is used in the therapeutic communities for young people in the UK.
Defining characteristics
In one sense there is no such thing as `the therapeutic
community' for children and young people, since every place claiming to
be one turns out to be different from each other in important ways.
These may be differences in terms of size, definition of task, or
philosophy of practice and especially in terms of what actually happens
in daily practice. There are also significant differences in origin,
since the therapeutic community approach in respect of child care has a
complicated and somewhat confused origin (see Ward 1996 and Bridgeland
1971).
However, despite these independent roots and individual variations, external observation does suggest that there is some common core of practice which can usefully be identified as the therapeutic community approach. This core would include:
1. an emphasis on the group care setting as a setting
for the medium- to long-term treatment of emotional disturbance rather
than simply as a place of temporary accommodation;
2. the use of psychodynamic rather than solely behavioural or cognitive
theoretical frameworks to underpin the treatment philosophy;
3. a commitment to the value of the physical and personal `environment'
for its contribution to the therapeutic task;
4. a general emphasis on the value of groupwork as a medium both for
therapeutic work and in some places for decisionmaking with the young
people;
5. in daily practice with the young people, a commitment to a personal
and involved style of working, in which the quality of the relationships
between young people and staff is seen as playing a central role in the
treatment process;
6. similarly, an emphasis on the potential for therapeutic communication
between staff and young people to arise from everyday interactions in
daily `living alongside' each other (i.e. opportunityled work) – see
page 68;
7. in education, an emphasis on the value of child-centred learning in
small groups, taking account of the connections between emotional and
intellectual development;
8. in internal management structures, an emphasis on each person's role
and potential contribution to the agreed task and philosophy rather than
mainly on status, rank and formal titles;
9. in the overall management of the place, a commitment to the
value of an external and thus relatively independent structure of
management and to the use of consultancy for senior managers as a means
of personal and professional support;
10. in some places, but not all, there is also a commitment to the use
of the daily community meeting as a medium for both practical and
therapeutic business between young people and staff in each living unit.
ADRIAN WARD
Ward, Adrian. (1998). A model for practice: The therapeutic community. In Ward, Adrian and McMahon, Linnet. (Eds.) Intuition is Not Enough: Matching learning with practice in therapeutic child care. London. Routledge. pp. 64-66.
REFERENCES
Bridgeland, M. (1971). Pioneer work with maladjusted children: A study of the development of therapeutic education. London. Staples Press.
Ward, A. (1996). Never mind the theory, feel the guidelines: Practice, theory and official guidancein residential child care: The case of the therapeutic communities. Therapeutic Communities, 17, 1. pp. 19-29.
