Alternatives to psychosocial fieldwork: part of the solution or part of the problem?

Abstract

The recent increase in the num­ ber of occupational therapy pro­ grams, coupled with the limited number of fieldwork placements in mental health, has made it increasingly difficult to find placements for Level II fieldwork students in traditional mental health settings. Although some aca­ demic Fieldwork coordinators have been able to continue placing students in typical in-patient and community-based mental health facilities, others have had to consider alternative strategies. One strategy is to place students at Fieldwork sites, such as work hardening, pain management, and head injury pro­ grams, where psychosocial dysfunction is not the primary diagnosis. The prob­ lem is that, although psychosocial com­ ponents are addressed in the daily inter­ actions with the clientele in these programs, they are not the focus of as­ sessment and treatment. The related is­ sues are, what is being done to ensure that students placed in alternative sites are learning to apply psychosocial as­ sessment and treatment methods and what will be the long-term impact of this type of placement on mental health practice? It is clear that the diminishing number of Level II Fieldwork sites in mental health is reflective of and inter­ woven with the decreased number of therapists practicing in mental health settings and in the reduced number of new graduates choosing mental health as a practice preference. The result of the reduced number of Level II field­ work sites in mental health settings is that there are fewel- opportunities for students to learn the (xcupational ther­ apy interventions and skills traditionally practiced in mental health and to ob­ serve occupational therapy role models.