Independent advocacy, neuro‐disability and spirituality? A history of advocacy with a case study from the Independent Mental Capacity Advocate (IMCA) service
Independent advocacy, neuro‐disability and spirituality? A history of advocacy with a case study from the Independent Mental Capacity Advocate (IMCA) service
复制标题
独立倡导、神经残疾和灵性？独立心智倡导者 (IMCA) 服务机构的案例研究的倡导历史？
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2011
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Geoff Morgan
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Geoff Morgan
目的-本文旨在展示独立精神能力倡导者(IMCA)在一些有资格获得IMCA服务的后天脑损伤客户的具体决策中所能做出的特殊差异。设计/方法/方法--一个案例研究，其中IMCA的作用是在选择性的文献回顾的背景下描述的，该文献回顾了与其作为一种职业的出现相关的倡导历史。本分析参考灵性和文化问题。发现--案例中提出的主题是参照正在进行的研究讨论的，这些主题与客户的最大利益相关，并与反身性作为倡导专业化的基础。研究限制/影响-IMCA从业者在明确定义的“最佳利益”情况下接受指导，在这种情况下，个人没有能力、支持或代表，或需要与某些决定相关的保障措施。在这些情况下，社会，文化，模拟..。
Purpose – This paper aims to show the particular difference Independent Mental Capacity Advocates (IMCA) can make towards specific decisions which some acquired brain injury clients, who are eligible for the IMCA service, experience.Design/methodology/approach – A case study is highlighted in which the role of the IMCA is described against the background of a selective literature review on the history of advocacy in relation to its emergence as a profession. This analysis references issues of spirituality and culture.Findings – Themes raised in the case are discussed with reference to ongoing research and these are related to the best interests of clients, and to reflexivity as a basis for the professionalisation of advocacy.Research limitations/implications – IMCA practitioners are instructed in well‐defined “best interests” situations, where an individual has no capacity, support or representation, or requires safeguarding measures in relation to certain decisions. In these cases, social, cultural, emot...