Editorial

Abstract

Welcome to the final issue of Volume 36 and to my last ever editorial for the journal. My first one, co-written with Jan Walmsley, was for the first issue of Volume 26. That was in 1998 and, pre-Valuing People, now seems like another age. And yet, although many things have changed during the intervening years, and the subsequent volumes of the journal, some things have stayed the same. Sadly the reality for many people with learning disabilities is that the goal of an ‘ordinary life’, originally spelt out in 1980, and reiterated here by Anne Williams in conversation with Andrew Holman, has yet to be attained. In the post-Valuing People era of Valuing People Now there is still much to be done to enable more people with learning disabilities to have their own homes, to have good health care, to have access to paid work and all the other attributes of an ordinary life. Scotland’s equivalent of Valuing People was the Same as You? (Scottish Executive 2000). Its focus was also on person-centred ways of working with people with learning disabilities and their families but it differed from its English counterpart in introducing local area co-ordination – leading to the appointment of local area co-ordinators throughout Scotland to work with individuals, families and communities to enable people to build a ‘good life’. The first paper in this issue, by Kirsten Stalker and colleagues, describes the achievements and the tensions of this approach. In spite of its patchy development, local area co-ordination is popular with individuals and families and has much to commend it. If we need convincing of how far we still have to go to help people achieve a ‘good life’ then the following paper, by Owens, Hubert and Hollins, is a salutary reminder. Charting the move of 11 women from a locked ward to (mostly) campus homes, the study found how little people’s lives actually changed. One of the reasons for no-change was lack of training and support for the staff involved. A possible solution, as advocated in the next paper, by Finlay, Antaki and Walton, is the use of video to encourage staff in residential services to adopt truly person-centred practice on a day-to-day basis. In the paper that follows, Joan Murphy and Lois Cameron demonstrate the effectiveness of Talking Mats to enable people with additional communication issues both to develop their understanding and to have a voice in their everyday lives. More specific issues are targeted in the next two papers. Simon Prangnell and Karen Green describe their work with Bill to alleviate his dental anxiety; and Wendy Goodman and colleagues report on their group work with men at risk of sexual offending. Next, McVittie, Goodall and McKinlay discuss how the participants in their study (who attended a community centre for people with learning disabilities) denied, resisted or made no reference to the label they had been ascribed. Finally, two papers discuss the possibilities (Kristin Bjornsdottir and Aileen Svensdottir) and the pitfalls (Alex McClimens) of collaborative research and writing. This is a typically rich and diverse set of papers – a good note on which to end my time as editor and to hand over to the new editor, Duncan Mitchell.