Supported Decision-Making Service

54 / 80

54
Supported Decision-Making Service for Persons with Disabilities | Service Model
The Human Rights Center for People with Disabilitis
8. March 3,
2015
Concern over
risk and harm
Discussion with Advocate Ayelet Sasson from
the legal department of the Ministry of Welfare.
The session focused on risk and harm situations,
on the reporting obligation of professionals and
particularly on the supporter's status and obligations
in such situations.
9. March 31,
2015
Support
services to other
populations
Discussion with Meital Peleg, Executive Director of
the not-for-profit association 'Shoulder to Shoulder'.
Learning about how the association provides
support to families living in poverty, focusing on
the numerous similarities to the "decision-making
supporters" project.
10. May 12,
2015
Mid-course
feedback
The session focused on the supporters' mid-course
feedback. Again, the issue of parental involvement
was raised – whether, when and to what extent.
Withdrawal and passivity of some of the service
recipients in the processes and the prescribed
time frame were discussed. One of the supporters
suggested that supporters should have prior relevant
professional qualifications.
11. June 9, 2015 A person's
support circles
The session focused on promoting awareness to
the person's support circles: the personal circle,
the professional circle and other social circles.
It is important that the service recipient fully
participates in the dialogue conducted by the
supporter with people from these support circles. It
is important to establish the support circles for the
service recipient.
12. June 29,
2015
The support
experience
Towards the end of the pilot – the purpose of
the meeting was to evaluate how the supporters
experience the process and how, in their opinion,
the service recipients understand its nature.
13. July 21,
2015
Support as
opposed to
treatment
and real-life
dilemmas
The session focused on the issue of support as
opposed to treatment – whether it is possible to
create sterile support. Will it always touch on
therapeutic aspects? If the answer is yes – are they
included in the supporter's mandate, and if so, what
are the limits?
With respect to goals, a dilemma was raised –
when the service recipient has no goals, should
the supporter encourage them to establish goals
or should the extent of support given be reduced,
such that when the person does have a goal, the
supporter will be more intensively involved.