As an independent contractor, I often find myself straddling worlds... for-profit, non-profit, corporate, human services, manufacturing, criminal justice, behavioral health and more – basically, wherever people gather to do work with and for other people. While there are broad similarities in language and performance expectations, some concepts just don’t translate exactly across environments.
 
Take Self-Care. Among human services and healthcare providers with high rates of mission-driven stress, secondary trauma and burn-out, it’s a pretty well-known concept. There are professional opportunities to learn what it is and how to implement it organizationally, as well as dedicated, paid time to practice self-care for individuals and mixed work groups. In fact, Meaningful Trainings has written and delivered more than a few customized self-care workshops for employers and employees alike.
 
It makes great sense; in professions where one is asked to help another individual (or community!) achieve wellness, it would stand to reason that the professional providing the service maintain a pretty good level of wellness themselves. And, there’s some pretty reliable research that suggests investing in self-care can save employers a lot of money. Think lost productivity, acute or chronic injury, stress-related disorders, personal and/or medical leave, not to mention the enormous cost of employee turnover.
 
So, I’m wondering why we get such quizzical looks and so many questions in manufacturing and “high stakes” corporate environments where long hours, physical and mental stress are often considered acceptable (desirable?) parts of the company culture. If all companies survive on the strength of their people, it seems reasonable to suggest that employee retention might better be served by a broader cultural definition… one that includes leadership driven and supported opportunities for on-site self-care – not just at the bar for Friday night happy hour or a weekend jaunt on the boss’ boat.
 
I know, I hear you… lots of companies have on-site fitness rooms, child care facilities, juice bars, conversation pits and game tables, too… but, sadly, lots more companies do not. So, for them, incorporating a little intentional “self-care” for their very valuable human resources might be a smart business decision.      

In my work as a community educator, organizational trainer and curriculum designer, I happened upon a gap of truly epic proportions. While whole systems are beginning to employ non-clinical recovery support personnel (coaches, guides, clinical aides, navigators, etc.), they have consistently failed to consider EXACTLY HOW to continually build and hone their employees’ required skills sets. So, 150 hours of skills development training later (covering everything from effective communication and MI to leveraging recovery capital), I noticed that the language and results associated with the medically well-known concept called “chronic disease self-management” might equally apply to those of us who celebrate and practice RECOVERY! In fact, documented positive results of similar proportion are exactly what organizations are striving for with all this hiring of recovery support personnel, after all. But, geez… with a name like CHRONIC, DISEASE, SELF-MANAGEMENT why on earth would we even want to go looking?
 
It sounds negative, dour, hopeless… not based in the language of joy and strength, whatsoever. This language “gap” can be particularly uninspiring for folks in recovery who are already soooo sensitive to the stigmatizing, negative words and attitudes that surrounds addiction. But here’s the kicker… effective “chronic disease self-management” relies on lay-person led, participant education programs that embody all the underlying skills and principles (positivity, clarity, self-efficacy) that are soooo recovery! I had to understand more.
 
I did my research. Turns out the Stanford Patient Education Research Center at Stanford School of Medicine offers several Self-Management Programs for chronic disease, diabetes, chronic pain, cancer survivors and people with HIV. The six-week, peer facilitated workshop format engages participants at various, accessible (welcoming even!) community locations like senior centers and libraries. Folks experience a “highly participative” gathering where “mutual support and success… build confidence” so they can better manage their health and lead fulfilling lives. Some of the topics include: practical strategies to address problems like frustration, isolation, fatigue; symptom relief; suitable exercises; medication use; effective communication techniques to improve interaction with families, friends and health professionals; lifestyle balance; and, critical thinking.
 
These programs have been the subject of rigorous randomized clinical trials and have shown time after time to improve participants’ outcomes, with some improvements lasting for years. Improvements like self-efficacy and healthy behaviors, positive attitudes, less pain, more energy, psychological well-being and less frequent hospital utilization among others. Excited to have made this discovery, I called Center Director and lead researcher, Dr. Kate Lorig, Dr. P.H. to ask if they had ever imagined building a program for addiction. Sadly, as far as Dr. Lorig could tell, Stanford had no immediate plans to consider it.
 
Well, I suspect as opioid deaths mobilize more and more communities, as the national conversation grows and amplifies… and as folks continue to confront the related stigma and labels that swirl around addiction… we, those of us in and around the work of recovery SHOULD and WILL need to consider it! Let’s keep it simple, positive, based in and on community… and let’s build a welcoming, peer-led, self-actualization program for ourselves!