Open Dialogue Interest Group

26 July 2016

Participants: Prof Niels Buus, Commissioner John Feneley, Sarah Hanson, Maria Fitzgerald, Paul O’Halloran, Peter McGeorge, Jonathan Harms, Judith Brown, Mark Orr, Lisa Dawson, Cathy Crowe, Laraine Smith, Glenise Shelley, Kristof Mikes-Liu, and Alan Rosen (by telephone)

Discussion:

John Feneley opened the night by thanking everyone for attending this interest group in their own time, particularly those who had travelled some distance to attend. Mr Feneley outlined the Commission’s interest in this area as demonstrated through previously hosting a number of international guests to talk about the Open Dialogue approach both in Europe and North America.

Niels Buus then spoke about his own interest in the area and his previous work on Open Dialogue in Denmark. Prof Buus spoke of his desire to develop training pathway in the approach commencing with a ‘train the trainer’ type program that would support the trial of Open Dialogue in up to 5 sites along the eastern seaboard.

Individuals around the table were invited to speak about their own interest and history with the Open Dialogue approach. Several attendees had been exposed to the approach through international travel/study. A strong common theme emerged that while not formally adopted, the Open Dialogue approach had strongly influenced the practice of those in attendance. It was noted there was a strong link between Open Dialogue and systemic Family Therapy which has a stronger history in NSW and could be used as a foundation to draw broader interest to Open Dialogue itself.

It was particularly noted that Open Dialogue can not be thought of as a strict ‘package’ of care with a set formula as the underlying mental health systems and structures are very different in NSW compared to Finland, Denmark, or North America. Rather it can be thought of as a set of principles about the way care is delivered in the community (particularly as early intervention either at first episode psychosis or to avert crisis)and how mental health practitioners engage with consumers and carers which can be adapted to fit within existing local systems.

Noted that the evidence base for Open Dialogue is limited and that a trial of the type discussed would add to the evidence base.

Key issues in terms of next steps included:

  • Securing funding for up to 14 individuals to engage in the ‘train the trainer’ course. This would be approx. 7000 euros per person and involve 8 intensive sessions over 2 years. The individuals would need to be practitioners so that they can apply their learnings as well as how to train others in the approach.
  • As mentioned above this is likely to be across 5 sites with potentially 3 in NSW (St Vincents, Western Sydney and Nepean Blue-Mountains). This means a mechanism for support and supervision across all trainees over the 2 year period will need to be developed.
  • Develop firm relationships with LHDs, PHNs and other relevant partners to this work.