Good luck to Julianne Moore for #Oscars2015

still alice still

Recently, I asked someone living with dementia whether he recommended I should watch “Still Alice”. He is yet to see the film.

He emphatically said, “yes”. In fact, he informed me that he would indeed buy the film if he thought it was any good.

“Still Alice” is a 2014 American drama film written and directed by Richard Glatzer and Wash Westmoreland and based on Lisa Genova’s 2007 bestselling novel of the same name. The film stars Julianne Moore in the role of Dr. Alice Howland, a Columbia linguistics professor diagnosed with early-onset Alzheimer’s disease.

Alec Baldwin plays her husband John, an ambitious medical researcher. Kristen Stewart, Kate Bosworth, and Hunter Parrish play her children Lydia, Anna, and Tom.

I was not looking forward to watching this film at all, despite its brilliant reviews. In a way, the film is in a ‘no win’ space of having not to over-glamourise dementia, and yet simultaneously not to depict it in overwhelmingly negative terms.

As someone who has been an academic and/or practitioner in this field since 1997, I really think the film is an excellent attempt at this very difficult topic.

No one person’s experience of dementia is the same as somebody else’s; and your perception of that person with dementia will depend on a huge number of factors, not least your own preconceptions and the coping strategies of the person living with dementia. The portrayal of Dr Alice Howland is completely believable though.

Dementia doesn’t just affect old people; although your risk of dementia increases as you become old.

The film is to be praised for emphatically demonstrating that the diagnosis of dementia affects friends and families, and not simply a person in isolation. Whilst the character Dr Alice Howland is initially told the possible diagnosis alone, it is clear that the whole family becomes involved.

There is a sense of the ‘prescribed disengagement’ which Kate Swaffer, living with dementia in Australia, has so graphically described. All too often the diagnosis of dementia is articulated as an ‘end’ rather than a beginning. I inevitably watched the film through the prism of how much it promoted the notion that it is possible to live better with dementia.

The effect on work in this particular story is interesting. I am mindful of other criticisms that portraying her as a linguistics professor is over-egging the topic somewhat, but reality can be larger than life. Prof John Hodges’ team in Australia, as is known publicly, was involved in charting the change in language profile of Iris Murdoch, renowned author and wife of Prof John Bayley who has recently sadly passed away.

In someone presenting with a clinical picture of early Alzheimer’s disease, with that particular distribution of abnormal amyloid protein in the brain (although we are not given precise details), as shown by PET neuroimaging, it might be entirely reasonable to seek out a genetic diagnosis such as a presenilin mutation. I realise that Dr Alice Howland is a fictional character, but the issue of how the issue of certain types of dementia might run in families is a very active one both in the US and here in the UK.

I quite liked the use of internet chat in the film. All around the world, there is interest in the intelligent use of technology to connecting unique individuals with dementia to others, and indeed to their past through the method of ‘life story’.

No film on this topic would be expected to be anywhere near perfect, and some of the issues will be raw for many, such as the choice of care homes and behaviour in them. However, I think that this film is as a good attempt as any to cover some hugely important issues.

I of course have reservations about aspects of the plot. Some people I know hated the film and the book. But I do wish Julianne Moore well, and I hope that she wins best Actress in the Oscars 2015 tonight/this morning.

Life story: an essential tool in living better with dementia

story

A life story is the essence of what has happened to a person. “Life story work” is not just about gathering information about a person’s life. It can cover the time from birth to the present or before and beyond. It includes the important events, experiences, and feelings of a lifetime. It can be a very helpful tool for dementia care.

Someone’s life story describes a human process uniquely lived by an individual. It directs the individual’s way of looking upon her self or himself and is, therefore, an important component in a person’s identity. To have a feeling of personal value, it is essential that the individual is seen. Life story work can be helpful in understanding more about the person’s interests and preferences. Listening to someone else’s story is a powerful way of bestowing value on that person. From birth to death, people live through many struggles, joys, relationships, triumphs, and disappointments that structure the meanings assigned to their lives.

Things which might be included are:

  • factfiles: lists of likes and dislikes/preferences, mother’s name, primary school
  • personal accounts: stories about first day at school, a holiday, what life was like in X during a certain period of time. photographs, family trees.

A person living with dementia is just that: a person first and living. Often for the person living with dementia, their main interaction with others is focused on personal care tasks. Whilst these are essential, a person is more than a group of tasks and should not only be defined by what they need.

Despite the progressive nature of dementia, persons with dementia show they still have the ability to recall past memories and to experience improvements in their perceived wellbeing. This provides an opportunity for care staff and other professionals to use life review and life story book as a part of care activity to improve and maintain the wellbeing, cognitive function and mood of individuals with dementia as long as possible. The emphasis on individual’s life stories and experiences appears to help staff to get to know residents better, and offers the potential for more individualised, person-centred care which recognises the importance of the person’s biography.

According to Linde (1993), there are two criteria to be fulfilled in a life story. First, a life story should include some evaluative points, which communicate moral values of the narrator. Secondly, events included in a life story should have a special meaning and be of such significance to the narrator that it can be told and retold throughout life. The use of biographical and life story work has a long history in dementia care, although the opportunities for people with dementia to express themselves by telling their story may be limited.

But life story work is not just about gathering information about a person’s life. What is important is the way in which the life story information is gathered. The challenge is to ensure each person lives well. This can be achieved by really getting to know the person through the development of a life story and focusing on the person’s abilities now, what they were and what they are interested in.

There is evidence to support the view that life story work can improve the relationship, whether family or professional, between the person with dementia and their carer(s). Persons are likely to describe life story work as an enjoyable activity. However, it is not just the activity that makes the event enjoyable, it is the forging of companionship that accompanies the sharing of the book which matter too. Benefits reported usually include enhanced well-being; improvements in mood and some components of cognitive function; and reductions in disorientation and anxiety and improvements in self-esteem, memory and social interaction.

In his seminal book “Dementia reconsidered: the person comes first”, Kitwood (1997) recognised these threats to the personhood of people with dementia and stated that biographical knowledge about a person “becomes essential if that identity is still to be held in place” (p. 56).

Kitwood (1997) suggested that one way of holding identity in place is through the conduct, production and use of a life story. Kitwood here defined personhood as ‘a standing or status that is bestowed upon one human being, by others, in the context of relationship and social being. It implies recognition, respect and trust.’

Other useful discussions of personhood are found on the Alzheimer Europe website.

Life story work offers a chance for family carers to illustrate the personhood of their relative; and allows care staff to get a sense of the person behind the dementia and make links between the person’s past and the present, so helping them respond more sensitively to need. Kitwood (1997) developed a framework of person-centred care that acknowledged the person with dementia’s sense of self, supporting care staff to act in ways that promoted a person’s sense of identity, autonomy and agency.

There is much debate in the literature as to what extent the self persists or diminishes in people with dementia. Some researchers contend that the self remains intact throughout the course of dementia. The common failure to recognise the individual’s continuing awareness of self can lead to low expectations for therapeutic intervention, to interactions that are limited to the task at hand (such as activities of daily living) and, therefore, to less than optimal experiences for a given level of dementia.

When a family member gradually loses the ability to tell or remember his/her life story, close family members often support the patient by taking over the storytelling or adding details to the story. Previous research has shown that this type of collaborative storytelling can be a deeply moral activity for the patient and his/ her close relative(s) in that there is a strong commitment to supporting the patient’s identity through the storytelling. Spiritual reminiscence, a type of narrative gerontology, has an important place in individual and community experiences of ageing. It is a way of telling a life story with an emphasis on what gives meaning to life, what has given joy or brought sadness. The process of spiritual reminiscence can identify issues of anger, guilt, or regret.

A number of challenges can potentially present when using life story work with people with dementia. Private and personal stories might, perhaps, sometimes divulged during the life story work process. Also it might also be possible to have a life story book that is rushed, contains errors or is of poor quality somehow detracts from the person and their life. There is a need for a final quality checking process that includes the person with dementia and family members before life story books are completed. But life history information can be recorded in a range of different ways including life storybooks, leaflets, collages, memory boxes and/or electronic formats.

 

References
Kitwood, T. Dementia Reconsidered: The Person Comes First. Open University; Buckingham: 1997.

Linde C. (1993) Life Stories: The Creation of Coherence. Oxford University Press, New York.

The English ‘Dementia Vision’ is a despotic dystopic farce

Dystopia

It’s a moot point whether the new ‘owementia Vision’ document, formally called the ‘Prime Minister’s Challenge on Dementia 2020′ will last longer than the current Prime Minister. Any reasonable person would feel that this has overstepped the line of political decency in being excessively partisan.

It was not so much published yesterday, but, rather, sneaked out under the RADAR of an announcement about how there were now one million ‘Dementia Friends’. Of course, this target was effectively gamed, by the offer of online routes for applying for a badge, and opening up new jurisdictions in the United Kingdom.

The new policy document is here.

One of the offerings in the new document is the reach-out to get a further 3 million dementia friends. Raising awareness of what dementia is is undeniably an important part of policy. But why could this project not been delivered across a number of dementia charities? Charities other than the Alzheimer’s Society have had their activities strangled off in an unbearably toxic atmosphere. The original press release claimed that “the £2.4 million programme is funded by the Social Fund and the Department of Health”. There is clearly also ‘mission creep’ in funding of this project. There then came the lucrative pitches for advertising agencies for this project as advertised by Public Health England. There’s overwhelmingly a need to lead a fight against dementia not necessarily to keep creative advertisers in gainful employment. How is it possible that the funds for a further reach-out for Dementia Friends can be successfully secured when social care is on its knees? Shouldn’t the responsibility of an independent dementia charity to campaign against a devastating situation in social care funding which has not been ring fenced since 2010? With nine out of ten care homes not meeting adequate standards for people living with dementia, David Cameron’s claim for the UK to the best place on the planet to have dementia is outrageously beyond contempt.

The first English dementia strategy was indeed an excellent document, making use of a wide variety of evidence; not simply documents produced by the Alzheimer’s Society. There is a vast number of Alzheimer’s Society initiatives mentioned, but not even with the most polite sop for others in the third sector. This complete lack of plurality in the third sector in dementia is reflected by the bare mention of specialist nurses, which have a huge amount to contribute in proactive case management. The fact that ‘Dementia Vision’ reads like a multi-author chain letter, rather than a coherent vision, is for me exemplified by the lack of acknowledgement that a national network of clinical nursing specialists in dementia would be in a great place to offer training and education of the workforce in dementia, and its different diagnosis.

But clearly this campaign has become severely muted in the rooms of the Downing Street and its friends, whilst the Health Services Journal is devoting a formidable supplement to it shortly. The whole issue of how people with dementia can avoid crises or hospital is a key one in health service provision, and whilst there is barely a mention of social care in the ‘vision’, apart from a ‘better care workforce’, there is mention of the infamous “Better Care Fund”:

better care fund dv

 

But even as Chris Ham, CEO King’s Fund, says, the Better Care Fund is not THE solution. And one of the main solutions on offer, with proper coordination of care, personalised care plans and data sharing, comes in the form of ‘whole person care’, completely airbrushed from the ‘Dementia Vision’ document.

Better Care Fund

The whole issue of the personalised care plan, as a mechanism for involving personhood throughout someone’s time post diagnosis with dementia, seems to be ignored, and the contributing members of ‘Dementia Vision’ are utterly wrong if they feel that they only apply to advanced care planning:

pcp

This is completely opposed to the current evidence-based literature. But this conveniently gets round the issue of clinical nursing specialists who are there at all points after the diagnosis of dementia. An Alzheimer’s Society “Dementia Adviser” will do. Funny that.

But I suspect that this is an inappropriate cheap political point, rather like the title of the document ‘Prime Minister Challenge on Dementia’, rather than a genuine disregard of important policy both here and abroad. Personalised care plans are covered in detail in the work from the Carers Trust and the Royal College of Nurse, and simply because of this disregard of this ‘Triangle of Care‘, together with the airbrushing of social care, my inclination is to flush the ‘Dementia Vision’ document down the toilet.

Dementia V|ision

How the excellent 2009 ‘Living well with dementia’ strategy document got transmogrified into a water-downed ‘dystopic’ wishlist for the Alzheimer’s Society is anyone’s guess, but the chaos in its formation is indeed charted well in Hansard. Even originally in February 2004, and a few months afterwards, the current Government were maintaining a pretence of strategy rather than a wishlist of ambitions.

For example

timetable for NSD

There are indeed some positive aspects to this, for example the investment in carers.

Greater support for carers: £400 million has been provided between 2011 and 2015 so that carers can take breaks and the Government has introduced significant legislative changes to better support carers, who for the first time will have the right to an assessment of their eligible need.

But even here the issues with the Dementia Action Alliance Carers Call to Action are not discussed. Nor is ‘life story’ discussed properly. The lack of evidence base for ‘Dementia Vision’, I feel, is the most haunting aspect of the work which will come back to haunt their authors. Particularly worrying is the extent to which the document will bind future Governments. The general parliamentary principle is no parliament can bind its successor, but with the catastrophic cuts in funding in social care does a new Government, if different from the Conservative Party and the Alzheimer’s Society, wish to fund a package for induction of top FTSE companies into ‘dementia friendly communities’. The whole dementia friendly communities is not without a significant body of critics worldwide, who have called it divisive and patronising, but this is another shoo-horn for domination from the Alzheimer’s Society. taxpayer

 

But then again this would be mitigated against if this programme could be organised by more than one stakeholder, for example the Joseph Rowntree Foundation.  As I remarked earlier this week, the “Dementia Vision” document reflects the ‘squeezed middle‘, between prevention of dementia at one end, care homes at another end, and aimless direction for those individuals attempting to live well with dementia who are in the meantime stuck in the middle. Sure, it is all very well to be ‘dementia friendly’, and I recognise the document’s recognition of international law in human rights, but there is no convincing discussion of equality and human rights. In the overall scheme of things, there are some reasons to be cheerful, as Ian Dury and Sube Banerjee put it, for example the EU ALCOVE recommendations for dementia policy.

Consequently, taken as a whole, the entire ‘Dementia Vision’ has turned sadly into a despotic dystopic farce. Dementia UK must, however, be congratulated though for being mentioned in a number of footnotes.