A few weeks ago, an interesting discussion took place on a forum I took part in. I think it is worth sharing some of what was discussed in this blog. The discussion was about the influence of the language used when talking about moving towards family-based care. This influence turned out to be greater than one might expect.
The people taking part in the discussion all had a background in social work and were either part of the social welfare system in their own country, or worked together with people from other countries to help them develop family-based alternative care. They were sharing their experiences with talking about a move towards family-based care and the reactions they received.
One of the things most people agreed on, from experience, was that the term ‘deinstitutionalisation’ was not very helpful. Although it is a good descriptive term indicating the aim of what is done, it often causes a negative reaction in those who hear it, particularly early on in the process. The term appears to conjure up images of closing down the institution to which people may have dedicated many years of their lives, and this may be taken as a rejection of their work and efforts.
Several people mentioned that when the word ‘deinstitutionalisation’ was used, it seemed like the defences of the people in the room went up and they were no longer willing to listen open-mindedly to what was being said. This is a major obstacle in the work, when you lose people’s cooperation that early on and need to invest time to win it back.
Another danger connected to the term deinstitutionalisation is that it tells you what to move away from, but not what to move towards. This can create the risk mentioned in earlier blogs (HERE and HERE) and a podcast (HERE) of people deciding to close the institution, simply by sending all of the children away, without proper preparation and support.
So, ‘deinstitutionalisation’ may not be the most useful term after all, when we want to convince people that that is what needs to be done. Terms that were found to be received more positively were ‘transformation of care’ and ‘move towards family-based care’.
Some people get irritated when you suggest that different terminology might be more effective, after all, they feel, it is about what needs to be done. But it does matter. If one term will help people get on board with your proposal, while another term will make them turn their back on you, that is quite a big difference.
And, after all, it is about what needs to be done, not about the terms you use, so why not use the terms that are more likely to help you do your work more efficiently?
Please share this blog, to help spread awareness.
