[Opinion] Shrinks won’t stay in public

As a psychologist working for the Director of Youth Protection (DYP), I salute our government’s desire to make changes to the university training course in psychology. Nice initiative! More psychologists, more financial support for interns, more clinical aspect in the baccalaureate, more professional opportunities for baccalaureate holders who will not enter the doctorate.

Except that…

Except that we don’t settle anything in the long term. We are counting on new psychologists who, recipients of an attractive scholarship, will commit to working for two years in the public system. We rely on bachelor’s graduates who, graduates or in the process of graduating, will fill needs in the public sector, particularly in youth protection. It is beneficial to increase the number of mental health workers in the public sector; but they still have to stay there…

Pierre-Yves McSween takes 8 minutes 21 seconds to demonstrate that this proposal from our ministers is short-sighted: shrinks will not remain in the public eye. They will leave it to practice as a liberal after their two years of commitment because psychologists in particular need professional autonomy. And these famous graduates who will come as reinforcements? Well, they will hold their public position for the moment of an internship, but they won’t stay there forever either. And if they did, they would end up like many of my colleagues: on sick leave or changing practice areas. In a few months or years, the lack of personnel will return at a gallop and during this time, complaints to the DYP will continue to increase.

Staff turnover is not anecdotal and the consequences are immediate. In my practice setting, when a colleague leaves, it’s a family that has to start over. Under high levels of stress, children and parents experience additional anxiety. Who will they be dealing with now? Imagine, this new stranger will now share your daily life. She will make recommendations to the court to decide your future and that of your children. As for her, she will do her best, but unfortunately when a worker leaves, she leaves with all the understanding of the families she followed.

This understanding must be rebuilt, because the objective is to enlighten the court to make the best decision for the future of the compromised child. Meanwhile, this child is waiting. And often, waiting damages. Sooner rather than later, we will experience the social consequences, as these children will grow up. And believe me, traumas are healed in the relationship with the other, especially that with his worker. A broken relationship is a missed opportunity.

The initiative of the government is good, sincerely, but if we dealt with the heart of the problem? What if we took care of caregivers? In the midst of negotiating collective agreements, energy should be put into making the conditions of mental health workers more attractive. We should work to settle once and for all the chronic irritants of stakeholders and restore the government’s reputation as an employer. When your job is to enter the catacombs of man, you need an employer you can team up with. The sustainability of the staff depends on this.

When we employ individuals to take care of others, we must set an example, because when we struggle to take care of those who take care, it is the children reported, the families, the individuals who suffer who pay the price. . The solution ? Professional autonomy, clinical support, working conditions: these are all good answers to encourage professionals to return to work, and, above all, to stay there.

To see in video


source site-40