Community Mentoring
Who is Mentoring For?
Who will benefit?
People who may benefit from Community Mentoring are:
- people whose lifestyles have been affected by loss and isolation, whose habits have changed and who are therefore suffering or are at risk of suffering ill health as a result – in particular suffering from or at risk of depression;
- people with mild depression which is likely to be improved by increased social contact and activity;
- people who are being treated for an illness or long-term condition for whom increased social contact and activity is viewed as a helpful part of their treatment or as an addition to it; or
- people whose isolation is associated with a mild personality disorder, who are at risk of suffering further ill health as a result of lack of activity and social contact, for whom a supportive group arrangement is a helpful part of management in the community.
In clinical terms these people are likely to exhibit signs of a number of the following:
- substantial psychological and physiological morbidity;
- depression;
- chronic illness;
- disability;
- quality of life measures for both mental and physical well-being below normal; or
- a substantial caring burden.
Experience and evaluation has suggested that mentoring can be particularly effective in improving the lives of people with signs of depression – from sub-clinical levels to people who are receiving formal treatment.
Mentors may draw in others who are not users of mentoring services to their activities because:
- people who are not themselves experiencing difficulties may support the group dynamics; and
- younger people enable cross-generational work.
These dynamics encourage social cohesion, help develop new facilities in the community which are geared to the community’s current interests and needs, and in particular help develop the capacity of communities to support vulnerable members.
Who is the service not for?
Mentors are not health or social care professionals, and are not counsellors or befrienders. The quality and effectiveness of the service would be prejudiced if it became focused on specific health and social care issues. Therefore the service is not appropriate for people who may:
- be violent;
- be alcoholic;
- have more than mild dementia; or
- have psychotic or personality disorders.
From the Boniface Centre, Crediton group:
“It relaxes me and calms me right down”
“It is opening me out, making me more confident.”
“We wouldn’t be able to do this if it wasn’t for you [Upstream].”
From a man at the Boniface Group:
“If I’d known about this sooner I’d have been here sooner…. I don’t want to sit at home on my own all day…. A group project like this will help me get to know people quicker.”
Comment after a mentor’s visit to client:
“You have done me so much good. Lifted my spirits. Life gets monotonous here. I need something worthwhile. Please come again.”
From the Tiverton group:
“I’m feeling so much better and everyone is telling me how well I’m looking.”
Comment from Tai Chi group:
The Tai Chi instructor quoted one lady who is enthused by the group sessions to continue practising Tai Chi at home: “She now has much more stamina and has not used her inhalers for quite a while.”
“Elderly people lose their confidence. You need a push, someone to encourage you. This is where Upstream are good because they go in gently. The mentors build up their confidence and that’s what they need. That’s so important because loneliness in old age is dreadful and it just gets worse and worse and worse.” (GP)
Some GPs in Mid Devon recognised that lder, more isolated patients were getting caught in a downward spiral of depression and dependency. Substantial health and social care resources were going into supporting a small but significant proportion of people. In many cases, because of isolation, older people were not receiving the attention they needed and deserved. This was particularly evident in a rural area such as Mid Devon with pockets of marked social deprivation and suffering from changes in agricultural practice.
The GPs identified quality of life and social inclusion as two of the key issues to be tackled. Government and local health initiatives on exercise and healthy eating represented only one side of a balanced healthy lifestyle. Mental, creative, stimulating engagement with others was, in the doctors’ view, equally important.
At the same time it was recognised that without rigorous evaluation the benefits of this work could not be demonstrated (see the Durham CAAHM Review). If health and social care authorities were ever to be persuaded of the value of providing this service, they would need clear evidence of the benefits and cost effectiveness of such a service.
