MENTAL HANDICAP VOL. 17 MARCH 1989

when the graphic display is already present. It is considered that, without having learned this discrimination, people may not be able to learn more complex ones.

The second disc, “Discrimination 2”, is designed to teach people to respond only when there is a particular shape, of given size and colour, on the screen, and not when another shape is present. So, for example, people could be taught to respond when there is a blue circle and not when t h e r e i s a red c i rc le , consequently discriminating blue from red.

Although the system is still very much at the evaluation stage, the initial results are promising. It has been used successfully to teach a man with a severe mental handiap to discriminate between a circle, a triangle, and a square.

I feel that a system of programs such as these must evolve by being used. I would, therefore, like to make the existing discs available to any readers who would like to try them, in return for any feedback they could give. The programs will run on a BBC By BBC B+ , or BBC Master computer. The system also requires a “Micrex” Toy Control interface and some form of touch pad to suit the people who are to be taught.

If you would like the system please send two blank formated 5.25 inch discs. I will supply the programs? together with literature on how to use them. S I M O N W H I T A K E R , C l in i ca l Psychologist, Princess Royal CHC, Greenhead Road, Huddersfield H D l 4EW.

Challenging behaviour - challenging the term

I note that, in line with current fashion, Mental Handicap is publishing papers using the term “challenging behaviour”. I am in sympathy with the ideas behind this term. The basis for changing from “problem behaviours” is that “problem” often implies that the difficulty lies with the individual, while “challenge” shifts the focus to the individual envi ronment f i t , and encourages changes in service systems to meet individual need. I have been using the term myself now for some time, when advising or training families and staff.

I do, however, feel uneasy about the term, and recent comments from other staff have helped me clarify why.

“Challenging behaviour” can be understood to imply that an individual is deliberately acting in a provocative way towards us . “ H i s behav iour i s challenging” for example, can give the idea that someone is intentionally taunting us to do something about it. We can therefore end up in a worse situation t h a n when us ing t h e o ld t e r m s “problem” or “difficult” behaviour; in that “challenging behaviour” can imply that not only is it localised in the person, but there is a deliberate intent to annoy.

Before rushing to our thesauruses to look for another term, I would like to question whether we need such a blanket term at all. The term “challenging behaviour” can be applied to many different behaviours, such as aggression, self-injury, stereotyped behaviours, and socially inappropriate behaviours, which can have a variety of functions and different topographical relationships to the environment. Perhaps having a blanket term to cover all of these behaviours encourages us to think in terms of a blanket solution - be it special units, special teams, or special techniques.

What we should really be seeking are individual approaches to meeting people’s needs, whether those needs involve a particular “challenge” to our current service provision or not. Using a more precise description of the type of individual need we are trying to meet may well be better than trying to produce a broad description to cover a wide variety of unrelated behaviours which have many different causes. GRAHAM C O L L I N S , Pr incipal Cl in ica l Psycho log i s t , D i s t r i c t Psychological Services , Cent ra l Nottingham Health Authority, Ransom Hospital, Rainworth, Nr. Mansfield, Notts, NG28 OER.

~ ~

Voting rights of people living in mental handicap hospitals

I am writing on behalf of the Good Practice Group for services for people with mental handicaps, Kidderminster and District. May I , through your journal, draw people’s attention to the Representation of the People Act 1983: Electoral Registration in Mental Illness and Mental Handicap Hospitals?

Whilst we welcome the recognition that people with mental handicaps have a right to vote, we were dismayed to learn that those resident in mental

handicap hospitals on an informal basis are yet again discriminated against. We believe that in insisting that they hold a different address for voting purposes from the one at which they reside, society is once again devaluing them as citizens. The Act purports to be offering them the opportunity to vote, but then places unnecessary obstacles in their path to prevent this. The process, instead of being simplified, becomes more complex and their basic human rights are eroded.

The Good Practice Group is strongly committed to the principle that if hospital (or hostel) has been people’s home for many years and is likely, often through no choice of theirs, to remain so for some time to come, then it is this ‘‘local’’ community whose services they use and contribute to in which they may wish to hold influence by using their vote; not the area they left, perhaps many years before, possibly many miles away, and with which their links may be very tenuous.

We have been taking up this matter with our local Members of Parliament and the former Secretary of State for Health & Social Services. Whilst their response has been for the most part sympathetic and understanding, they indicate that the matter was debated fully in Parliament when the Act was passed and the proposal that people be able to use their hospital address for entry on the Electoral Role if resident on a long-term basis was rejected. Several of the correspondents also suggested that this issue is unlikely to be debated again for some t i2e unless thkre is strong representation to indicate that the situation is unacceptable.

We would ask readers, therefore, to consider this issue. If they believe as we do, that people with mental handicaps should not be discriminated against in this way, we would ask them to contact their own local Members of Parliament to ensure that they realise the extent of feeling on this issue and that action should be taken to change this law.

If you would like further information on this subject, please contact me. PAM HYETT, Deputy Director of Nursing and Hospital Services, Lea Hospital, Stourbridge Road, Bromsgrove, Worcs. B61 OAX .

1 To advertise in I I MentalHandicap 1

please ring I (0562) 824933 for details.

0 1989 British Institute of Mental Handicap 39