Search

Background: A joint statement from two federal agencies in the United States calls for coordination and collaboration between programs serving families of infants and toddlers who are at risk or developmentally delayed or disabled U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Policy guidance: Joint statement on collaboration and coordination of the MIECHV and IDEA Part C programs. (2017). Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. ED/HHS Joint Guidance Document: Collaboration and Coordination of the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Part C Programs. Young Native American children living on tribal lands in this country are currently eligible for two federal programs associated with these agencies which overlap in mission and implementation. Purpose: This paper outlines potential strategies for creating a more seamless system of services for tribal families involving more centralized intake processes and procedures, cross training of staff to work across programs, and adopting more unifying approaches to program implementation. Conclusion: A streamlined system of services will result in interventions that better support family and child outcomes while reducing duplication of services, consolidating the limited number of qualified professionals available to provide services, and increasing convenience and cultural attunement of services to Native American families currently participating in both programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The predominant position in the reproductive rights literature argues that access to assisted reproductive technologies (ART) forms part of an individual's right to reproduce. On this reasoning, refusal of treatment by clinicians (via provision) violates a hopeful parent's reproductive right and discriminates against the infertile. I reject these views and suggest they wrongly contort what reproductive freedom entitles individuals to do and demand of others. I suggest these views find their origin, at least in part, in the way we define "reproduction" itself. This paper critically analyses two widely accepted definitions of human reproduction and demonstrates that both are fundamentally flawed. While the process of reproduction includes the biological acts of begetting and bearing a child, I argue that it does not extend to include rearing. This reworked definition has little impact in the realm of sexual reproduction. However, it has significant ethical implications for the formulation and assignment of reproductive rights and responsibilities in the non-sexual realm in two important ways. First, a claim to access ART where one has an intention to rear a child (but does not beget or bear) cannot be grounded in reproductive rights. Second, lacking an intention to rear does not extinguish the reproductive rights and responsibilities for those who collaborate in the process. I conclude that clinicians collaborate in non-sexual reproduction at the point of triggering conception (begetting) and therefore have the right to refuse to be involved in non-sexual reproduction, in some instances, as do all reproductive collaborators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Family-centered care (FCC) is widely established as the standard professional practice model in pediatric hospital settings (Arabiat, D., Whitehead, L., Foster, M., Shields, L., & Harris, L. (2018). Parents' experiences of family centred care practices. Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 42, 39–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedn.2018.06.012; Espe-Sherwindt, M. (2008). Family-centred practice: Collaboration, competency and evidence. Support for Learning, 23(3), 136–143. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9604.2008.00384.x). It embraces social work values that promote self-determination and family empowerment by positioning family members as partners in healthcare treatment, delivery, and decision-making (Kuo, D. Z., Houtrow, A. J., Arango, P., Kuhlthau, K. A., Simmons, J. M., & Neff, J. M. (2012). Family-centered care: Current applica?tions and future directions in pediatric health care. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 16(2), 297–305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-011-0751-7). To promote and advance FCC principles, healthcare organizations collaborate with patients and families as lived experience volunteers, or family leaders, to ensure program design and education reflect users' perspectives and experiences. Despite evidence for its efficacy and uptake (Arabiat, D., Whitehead, L., Foster, M., Shields, L., & Harris, L. (2018). Parents' experiences of family centred care practices. Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 42, 39–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedn.2018.06.012), translating FCC principles into practice can be challenging (McCarthy, E., & Guerin, S. (2022). Family-centred care in early intervention: A systematic review of the processes and out?comes of family-centred care and impacting factors. Child: Care Health and Development, 48(1), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/cch.12901). In this paper, we introduce an innovative training program for family leaders that embodies the core principles of FCC. The training program was developed in collaboration with families, healthcare and higher education stakeholders, and engagement specialists by a social worker in a pediatric rehabilitation setting in Toronto, Ontario. The program prepares family leaders to engage in teaching and facilitation roles in healthcare education. The Teaching and Facilitation Course for Family as Faculty is the first program of its kind in Canada and was recently recognized by the Health Standards Organization of Canada as a leading practice in healthcare. Since launching in 2019, over 50 participants connected with healthcare organizations across Ontario have completed the course. Graduates have partnered with educators in designing and facilitating over 85 initiatives and workshops across healthcare and academic institutions. The outcomes of a utilization-focused program evaluation, including the strengths and lessons learned are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2021, a large urban university-based hospital transitioned to a new two-floor emergency department. Despite the new environment, there were usability and workflow challenges with the space. The authors of this paper created a multidisciplinary, human-centered design collaborative of clinicians, university faculty, and students in an effort to increase emergency department efficiency. After thorough design-research and clinician-focused collaboration, the authors and design team identified the need to improve medical supply retrieval time, which directly impacts patient care and clinician satisfaction. The primary interventions consisted of a redesign that is as follows: (a) created standardized icons related to organ system, (b) increased visibility of supply labels, and (c) reorganized supplies based on usage data. Although a successful project, it was not without several barriers discussed in this article, including design researcher and clinician-level setting and engagement, academic/institutional policies, and conflicting schedules. In addition, the lessons learned from implementing human-centered design concepts into clinical workflow sets forth future research opportunities and inspiration for other institutions to collaborate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]