How We Debrief: An Interpretive Description of Social Service Community Workers' Experiences
Abstract
The aim of this research was to understand current practices of debriefing being used or not used in community social service organizations and the presumed frameworks or evidence justifying these practices in London, Ontario. The geographical area under concern has seen an increasing poverty gap, lack of affordable housing, toxic drug crisis, with mental health issues being exasperated by the pandemic. Social service agencies are overwhelmed with caseloads, creating an increase in need of care for frontline workers, as they are the first point of contact for many. This research utilized an interpretive description methodology to explore workers’ experiences and created a unique opportunity to hear practice-based knowledge from those who live the concept of concern, namely debriefing. Qualitative data were collected from staff at the 10 participating organizations, 41 participants completed online text-based surveys with 9 one-on-one interviews conducted through the Zoom platform. The results show that more than half of the sample were receiving some form of debriefing. Participants’ perceptions were further examined revealing a strong connection between two sub-themes underpinning the broader challenge of a ‘fear of disclosing’: being conceived as weak and having had traumatizing debriefing episodes in the past. Participants felt stigmatized when reaching for help, resulting in an unintentional ‘mental health stigma’ by co-workers and at an organizational level. Ultimately, we find that workers have a willingness to communicate with peers privately about their experiences but often do not feel safe enough to do so in current models of debriefing, resulting from an environment that ‘lacked psychological safety’. This study shows that most frontline workers who participated in this study, desired better organizational-led debriefing practices, rooted in evidence-based models.