I think there is a tension that exists between peer identity and peer practice. A tension that exists between authenticity and legitimacy.
In an interdisciplinary team, we want to both say and show that we are "equal in status yet different in function". We want to say that we are unique in that our discipline is based upon experiential knowledge and that type of knowledge has legitimacy within behavioral health. This is a kind of knowledge and experience that is gaining traction but yet still in many settings that remains in question.
We also want to remain clear and distinct with our role and avoid that "drift back into clinical waters". We are not a clinical support but we are an evidenced-based support. We have insights, a story, and a set of experiences that we can offer that will add to rather than take away from the mental health care we offer whether inpatient or in a community setting.
The evidence of the effectiveness of peer supports as a discipline can be seen in so many places:
- At the VA
- SAMHSA-"Building A Foundation of Recovery– How States Can Establish Medicaid-funded Peer Support Services"
- The President’s New Freedom Commission on Mental Health Report in 2003
- The Rand Corporation's Mental Health Consumer Providers : A Guide For Clinical Staff.
- National Association of Peer Specialists
- National Coalition For Mental Health Recovery
- The Depression and Bipolar Support Alliance
- The American Self-Help Group Clearinghouse
- The Peer Support and Advocacy Network (PSAN)
- Peers Envisioning and Engaging in Recovery Services (PEERS)
- Mary Ellen Copeland's Mental Health Recovery & WRAP
- The National Empowerment Center
- Georgia Certified Peer Support Specialist
The evidence is overwhelming that peer supports is a body of knowledge, and a discipline to be trained in and to flourish in as a profession in NC.
Specialists...Hold your heads high!!!
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.