|
I don’t think it’s a matter of seeing those exact words in print but a concept of evaluating the “effect of the device” on the resident. One has to make a determination that a resident has the cognitive and/or physical ability to remove a device to perform whatever task they normally would be able to do. Many people who can remove something as a “behavior” cannot put the “task together in their mind to perform same when it comes to having “intent and purpose”. Also there is more to movement than transfer and ambulation. There is readjusting weight in chair, adjusting clothing, scratching to name a couple. Also, let’s not let the semantics of the word “command” raise red flags as certainly no one is “commanding” anyone but if the resident cannot perform the task when you ask them to demonstrate how to remove the device there is a reasonable possibility they can not do it unaided when they “want to”. When my staff had trouble with this I asked the women—How would you like to be sitting in your room with a velcro lap tray, your skirt up around your waist and be unable to remove the device to pull your skirt down? I asked the men: Same scenario but zipper down. I think the idea is “if the resident is dependant on staff to remove and/or assist with removal of device no matter how minor even verbal cueing it has the “effect” of restraining.
-----Original Message-----
In a message dated 4/27/2004 8:52:18 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'd like to know this too. As RENA recently stated, it IS a restraint when it prevents someone from doing something (transfer, ambulation) he is ABLE to do. If he's unable to, it's not a restraint! |
