The impact of psychological contracting in a probation team working with offenders with Personality Disorder Jim Walkington Offender Manager Dr. David Harvey Clinical Psychologist

What are we talking about here? Contracting between a clinical psychologist and an offender manager in a supervision context and the impact this had on the work of the offender manager This process has taken place with all the offender managers, and some operational leads, specialising in working with “PD offenders” in the National Probation Service in Hull Easy to implement and valuable for workforce development

What is contracting? Contracting is making clear agreements between two or more people, aiming to make the implicit aspects of a relationship become explicit, predictable and collaborative We have used: – Practical contracting – Psychological contracting - “Speaking about what doesn’t normally get spoken about” A conversation and written document that is reviewed

What contracting offers individual offender managers who work with PD Formative focus on learning Modelling of psychological conversations, with emotions, processes and the “personal self” considered of value Therapeutic use of explicit communication Normative focus on accountability High challenge with clear expectations Clarity of roles -helping to help yourself, not encouraging dependency Restorative focus on support Validation of emotions Collaboratively developed understanding of complex and emotional experiences Proctor’s functional model of supervision (1986/92)

What contracting offers teams who work with PD Maximises the reflective capacity and the therapeutic potential of the whole team Fosters optimistic and trusting relationships between all team members Contributes to a sense of feeling safe and contained, yet accountable, across the team Reflects important principles for teams who work with clients who may attract a diagnosis of PD (Livesley, 2005; Ramsden, 2010; NICE, 2009)

Our contract Providing high support and high challenge Naming processes in the room and trying to understand them Discussing personal reactions and personal coping Our discussion We named the avoidance of certain topics and questions We examined them together We made sense of it on a personal level My experience Increased understanding of myself and my coping Reduced anxiety about ‘ruptures’ and ‘perfection’ so increased confidence Increased awareness of what wasn’t getting spoken about and why My practice Talking about the “good” and “bad” - allowing it to get messy! Being direct whilst acknowledging and validating client vulnerabilities Pro-social modelling of recognising emotions Our risk m’gment Strengthening internal controls via increased emotional awareness Increased “psychological” understanding of offending behaviour (“the bad”) Ability to hold in mind the “good” and the “bad” when assessing risk

References Livesley, J. (2005) Principles and strategies for treating personality disorder. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 50, 8, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (2009) Borderline personality disorder: Treatment and management- CG78. London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (2009) Antisocial personality disorder: Treatment, management and prevention – CG77. London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Proctor, B. (1986) Supervision: a co ‑ operative exercise in accountability. In: Enabling and ensuring supervision in practice. M. Marken and M. Payne (eds). Leicester National Youth Bureau and Council for Education and Training in Youth and Community Work, Leicester. p.21 ‑ 23. Proctor B (1992) Supervision in the Helping Professions. Milton Keynes: Open University Press. Ramsden, J. (2010) Beyond therapy – the wider role of the psychologist in treating personality disorder. In Murphy & McVey (eds) Treating Personality Disorder: Creating Robust Services for People with Complex Mental Health Needs, Routledge: London & New York