I had a sense that attending the conference organised by our collective body, would reinvigorate my feelings around my practice. Yet, I was struck by how deep my reconnection was, to both my peers and the speakers, who so inspired us (notably, many of us are now enamoured with Tia DeNora!). It was an unprecedented opportunity for us to engage in a celebration and a critique of our profession. As such, I would like to echo the sentiments expressed by those, much wiser than myself and reflect on my personal experience of the conference. (Bear in mind, I couldn’t engage in all available content.)
I’d like to comment on the themes I picked up on, which ran through the weekend, namely “diversity”. I felt this had a strong recurrence in the proceedings (not least because it was contained within the conference title!) and its reference throughout the event was numerous. I experienced many an epiphanic moment (as I am one to do), but this was most notable whilst I was listening to Tia De Nora. Contained in her keynote speech was the suggestion of “control vs collaboration”, a dichotomy (if seen as such), which can be interpreted in a multitude of ways. I immediately wondered if “collaboration” was linked to “diversity” and I promptly transposed this concept to many domains. Are we too controlling as a profession, in terms of defining our practice? Are we holding ourselves back from developing, because we don’t collaborate enough? (Bear in mind, I am VERY new to the profession) I began to discuss this with anyone who would listen, hoping to gain some insight from those around me. As such, at the “question time” evening, I posited: to collaborate (and ultimately diversify), do we need to loosen control? It was a purposefully broad question and it was met with equally broad reception. One such response came from a guest on the “question time” panel who, as a previous music therapy client, addressed this with personal insight. He eluded that music therapy had offered him the opportunity to be himself and to be heard. He perceived that other professionals (with whom he had felt like a “subject”) had worked on as opposed to with him. Perhaps it is the concept of “working with” that relates to collaboration, whereas to work “on” something is more controlling. A subsequent response came from a panel member, who queried whether the term “collaboration” could refer to interprofessional work. Indeed, this was more akin to my initial thinking. It was then stated, that an aim of the conference was to challenge our profession on the collaboration front, hopefully contributing to the understanding and development of music therapy in the wider community. So, I was left contemplating; how can we effectively collaborate, (in whatever form this may be) and must we relinquish some control to achieve progression? I’d like to refer to Gary Ansdell here, who highlighted a concern that I tend to agree with: that music therapy (in a similar way to psychotherapy) sometimes risks fencing itself off with clinical terminology. Can this be a barrier to collaboration? As an antidote to this, both Gary and Tia have written books about using a sociological lens to inform their clinical work. Though I don’t have a deep understanding of this, they both referenced giving value to the knowledge and expertise of “the other” (whether this is a client or another practitioner). It seems they adopted a broad and accepting attitude to varied approaches and discovered more dimensions to their practice, by exercising an open mind. Perhaps to facilitate learning in this way, collaboration must take precedence, whilst control takes a back seat, in terms of our methodologies and language. Indeed, if our aim is to bring a more public awareness to our work, perhaps a more “down to earth” approach is required. On the other hand, though I resonate with those who seem highly in favour of collaboration, I wonder whether some fear resides around our professional identity, when such ideas are posed. Balance is ALWAYS something that I return to, when pondering dichotomies or divergent ideas; I very much traverse the “grey-areas”. Exploring the poles, if we exercise too much control, we become inflexible and unmovable: a closed off profession only accessed by those who share our methodologies. Conversely, if we allow ourselves to collaborate to the point of dilution, we could put our protected title, that was historically fought for, in jeopardy. (As a side note, I encountered little conversation around our HCPC status, which is allegedly under scrutiny.) At the end of the weekend, I was left feeling that we mustn’t allow our belief in our profession to be perceived as a hierarchical attitude, which was partly inspired by my witness to statements such as: “well, their work is fine, but it’s not music therapy”. This attitude could fence us in and enclose us within an echo-chamber. Preferable to me, is a sensitive and open-minded approach, which could help us gain more dimensions to our practice, like Gary and Tia found. To me, diversity means engaging other professionals with the sensitive ear of the therapist and approaching new situations with a willingness to learn. I believe we can and must function alongside music practitioners, MDTs and the wider community, seeking and benefitting from the wisdom that can be gained from collaboration. In promoting such an approach, our profession will hopefully continue to blossom and move forward in symbiosis with those around us.
2 Comments
|
AuthorHeather Roberts. Writing the occasional blog when the feeling takes me. Archives
September 2018
Categories |