Rehabilitation Centre - Access to resources: Delays and lack of information

A woman whose son was registered with a rehabilitation centre deplored that the group activities in which he took part had ended. She felt the institution’s proposals concerning the resumption of the activities and the waiting time for other rehabilitation services were not acceptable.

The citizen’s complaint concerned:

• the non-resumption of her son’s group social skills training activities in September 2007, and the institution’s failure to keep her informed of the situation;
• the irrelevance of the proposal made to her son in January 2008, to the effect that he should join a social skills training group composed of 12-16 year-olds; in her opinion, the age difference would compromise the outcome;
• the waiting time for obtaining an initial individual rehabilitation service, notably in occupational therapy, was 52 months.

The Québec Ombudsman’s investigation revealed a number of deficiencies:

Concerning the interruption of services

• At the end of the group social skills training session in the spring of 2007, the group leader led the user’s mother to believe that another session would take place the following September; the mother therefore expected to be notified of the new session, as had been the case in the past;
• Although a group was in fact set up during that period, the user was not invited to join, because the institution, after examining his file, felt he did not have the required profile. However, the decision was not discussed with the user’s mother, who learned of the group’s existence from a third party;
• The social skills training program is offered sporadically, on an occasional basis, depending on the institution’s ability to put together a group of people with similar profiles;
• The decision not to ask the complainant’s son to join the new group was therefore justified by the fact that his profile did not fit the September 2007 group, and the fact that it was impossible to recruit enough people with profiles similar to his;
• The investigation also revealed deficiencies in communications between the rehabilitation centre and the woman concerning the program’s conditions and practical details, with the result that confusion arose with regard to the resumption of activities in September 2007.

Concerning the proposal that the user should join a group of 12-16 year-olds

• The woman felt it would not be appropriate for her 16-year-old son to be in a group with 12-year-olds, among other things because he did not enjoy the company of younger participants, and she herself felt it was risky to place him in a group with very young girls;
• The purpose of the group was to develop social skills, not to make friends, and the level of supervision did not allow for inappropriate relationships between participants. In addition, the group’s goals were not compromised by the participants’ age differences; assessments had confirmed that the target youths all had fairly similar levels of social functionality;
• The assessments did not take self-esteem into account, even though the user in question may have felt devalued by being placed with young adolescents when he considered himself to be virtually an adult;
• The methods used to assess youths for participation in this type of group, while not necessarily inadequate, could nevertheless be improved.

Concerning the waiting times for individual rehabilitation services

• Given the priority level assigned to the user’s needs when he registered for services with the institution, the waiting times were not unfair because all the other users with the same priority code had been waiting for just as long. However, they were unreasonable;
• The mother complained that she always had to take the initiative of contacting the institution to inquire about her son’s progress on the waiting list;
• The lack of active follow-up by the institution with the user and his representatives during the extended waiting period was identified as an irritant that could be remedied.

After examining the complaint, the rehabilitation centre undertook:

• to include, in the review handed to parents at the end of a group social skills training session, a reminder of the conditions for resumption of the program’s activities, so as to avoid any ambiguity in this respect.

The rehabilitation centre fulfilled its undertaking.

The Québec Ombudsman recommended that the rehabilitation centre should:

• ensure the accuracy of the information contained in the social skills training program information document, to avoid any ambiguity concerning the program’s goals and operation;
• ensure that the concept of self-esteem is taken into consideration when assessing young people as potential participants in group social skills training sessions;
• develop a follow-up procedure for users on its waiting lists, to ensure that communications are actively maintained during the waiting period.

The rehabilitation centre accepted and followed up on the Québec Ombudsman’s recommendations.