Silbmeran School of Social Work at Hunter College, City University of New York.
Am J Orthopsychiatry. 2021;91(4):545-557. doi: 10.1037/ort0000552.
Could practitioners and members (consumers) of mental health or other organizations interact socially by regularly going out for drinks or dinner together, for example? The American Psychological Association explicitly states for example, "your psychologist shouldn't also be your friend." However such social interactions have occurred for decades in certain clubhouse-modeled community mental healthcare, and maybe research and a more balanced perspective is warranted.
DESIGN/METHOD: We interviewed six clubhouse staff that interact socially with members and held three focus groups with 20 members.
RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS: In relation to what we call a social interaction policy, we herein highlight: (a) four policy dimensions (e.g. activity types; relationship closeness); (b) a spectrum of policy challenges (e.g., dealing with romantic overture; feelings of exclusion or hurt and effects on mental health; symptom flare-up while out socializing; financial constraints of members such as dinner costs on limited incomes); and (c) a wide variety of policy benefits such as: (a) learning opportunities for members who can process with staff the ups and downs of social relationships; (b) social skill and network development; (c) enhanced assessment across different times/settings; (d) addressing stigma among staff who must grapple with internal resistance to spend free time with members; (e) enrichment of staff social life; (f) reducing internalized stigma among members when staff value them more holistically; and (g) empowerment of members when staff freely (and optionally) offer a valuable resource (spare time). We offer suggestions for certain types of agencies that may wish to implement social interaction policies. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
例如，心理健康或其他组织的从业者和成员（消费者）是否可以通过定期一起出去喝酒或吃饭等方式进行社交互动？例如，美国心理协会明确规定，“你的心理学家不应该也是你的朋友。”然而，在某些以会所模式为基础的社区心理健康保健中，这种社交互动已经存在了几十年，也许有必要进行研究和更平衡的观点。
设计/方法：我们采访了六位与会员进行社交互动的会所工作人员，并与 20 名会员举行了三次焦点小组讨论。
结果/结论：关于我们称之为社交互动政策的问题，我们在此强调：(a) 四个政策维度（例如，活动类型；关系亲密程度）；(b) 一系列政策挑战（例如，应对浪漫姿态；感到被排斥或受伤以及对心理健康的影响；社交时症状加剧；会员的经济限制，如有限收入的晚餐费用）；以及 (c) 各种各样的政策利益，例如：(a) 为会员提供学习机会，让他们可以与工作人员一起处理社交关系的起伏；(b) 社交技能和网络发展；(c) 在不同时间/环境下增强评估；(d) 解决工作人员中存在的污名问题，他们必须应对与会员共度闲暇时间的内在阻力；(e) 丰富工作人员的社交生活；(f) 当工作人员更全面地重视他们时，减少会员的内化污名；以及 (g) 当工作人员自由（和可选）提供有价值的资源（业余时间）时，赋予会员权力。我们为可能希望实施社交互动政策的某些类型的机构提供了建议。（PsycInfo 数据库记录（c）2021 APA，保留所有权利）。
