Gloriously Ordinary Sundays - 17th November 2024

Me myself I.

We all communicate who we are in a range of ways – how we dress, style our hair, the music we listen to, the papers we read. We share our opinions, passions and world views on social media and in conversations with friends and family. Sometimes we (I) choose our words carefully, sometimes not so much (gets me into trouble sometimes).

My point is, as adults we control this communication. I can remember several teenage conversations with my mum about being ‘inappropriately’ dressed and a ban on me dying my hair, but by the time I left home at 18 and went to live in New York, she could comment on my bleached hair and classic New Romantic 1980s clothes (my word I looked amazing) but could do nothing.

How we write about ourselves is even more powerful as it’s there in black and white. I was on a lunch and learn this week with the lovely people from Ideas Alliance talking about setting up on your own in business and the lessons we have learned. One lesson I shared was knowing what you’re good at and being able to tell people, but just about everyone on the call said how excruciatingly difficult that is to do. If we write about ourselves, we think carefully about how we want to portray ourselves.

This week, I’ve spoken with two families about the things that get written about us. A central premise to the work that Bryony Shannon and I are doing in our Gloriously Ordinary Language programme is that words are powerful – what we say and write about people matters as it affects how we then think about support and how people might want to live their lives. Both conversations this week though were about writing in the first person, specifically people’s support plans. Both families had asked for help to challenge support plans about their loved one because both plans were written in the first person and both families felt uncomfortable. Here are some direct quotes:

‘I do not like to eat vegetables except peas therefore staff need to prompt me to buy and eat vegetables and present them in each meal.’

‘I need to be prompted and supported to have my daily personal care. I may refuse to brush my teeth and need reminding that this is important.’

‘I manage my own day-to-day finances, although I need support to budget and understand that when my money runs out there is no more. I would benefit from a budget plan now I am settled into my new home.’

‘I can sometimes interrupt people’s conversations and ask repetitive questions, and I need to be reminded that this is inappropriate.’

I don’t know about you, but all of those sentences fall under the heading of ‘Things I would say about myself… NEVER!’ . It just feels like such a bizarre thing to do.

I did a bit of asking around and found that this whole concept of writing support plans in the first person is common practice. When I asked why, the answers included,

‘We have to write in the first person because CQC say we must’

‘We do it because it’s more person-centred’

‘We’ve always written in the first person’

Really?

It got me thinking about the few occasions that I might write about myself in the first person. My CV, for instance, which includes,

I am a long-term user (avoider) of mental health services, and I have 2 autistic children who I fostered from the ages of 8 and 10. They are now 25 and 29 and turning into fine young people. I am passionate about inclusion and the right of all people, regardless of their label/diagnosis, to live the life they choose - to have Gloriously Ordinary Lives. This and my personal experience is reflected in all my work.

Or my dating profile….

Unerringly positive, frustratingly pedantic, lover of life, the world and the universe. Single for millennia but starting 2024 by exploring the possibility that this might not need to be a long-term condition. I'm quite nice really.

Those of you who know me, will probably smile and say that this sums me up pretty well (although the dating profile clearly isn’t working). The point is that they are my words about me. I can choose to write in a slightly self-deprecating or factious way and I’m comfortable about that. Both people whose families I spoke to did not use words to speak so they were categorically not their words. They were words written by people making value judgements about who that person is and what is true – what they (or the system) think is important for that person based on cultural norms and, frankly bollocks (technical term). How many of you reading this always eat your five portions of veg per day, have a clear budget that you stick to or never interrupt people? I thought not.

I feel the need to say, how dare we?

I was tempted to suggest that this might be a new test for Gloriously Ordinary Lives, but it clearly falls under Test One – how much would you like someone to write a plan for your life and hold you to it, making out that you had written it yourself?

As a postscript, the line about the person only eating peas was also actually not true…

PS. Did you see? The Gloriously Ordinary Sundays Podcast episode 8 is here. I chat with the wonderful ⁠Mary Gardner, and we discuss how Direct Payments and personal assistants are a key route to Gloriously Ordinary Lives. We share 5 top tips for Local Authorities on making Direct Payments and personal assistants work effectively.

PPS. Have you heard the news?

Tricia Nicoll and Kate Mercer are excited to announce our new programme, Advocating with and for Gloriously Ordinary Lives, starting in January 2025.

A Gloriously Ordinary Lives and Black Belt Advocacy collaboration.

BOOKING IS NOW LIVE! To find out more and book a place, click here.