Finally, I got an official email from the local NAS representative of the official rules for the local support group:
The current NAS SOMAAG Devon rules are what members sign up to when they first join.
They are:
Policy - to be viewed as essential behaviour
- Confidentiality
- Respect for oneself and others
- Consideration to be given to other members' feelings
- Honesty about personal feelings and other issues of trust
- No bullying
- No swearing
Good Practice - to be viewed as desireable behaviour
- Listening and turn taking - only one person to speak at any one time
- Openness and frankness about personal feelings
- Non-judgemental attitude - each members has a right to their own opinion; you may disagree with that opinion but you cannot overrule an opinion you disagree with
- No raised voices
- No excessive swearing
- Punctual attendance at meetings unless unexpected circumstances arise
- Inform someone if you are not able to attend a meeting
- No use of mobiles as telephones during the meeting
- No alcohol or drugs to be brought to meetings
It also says 'The spirit of these principles is to enable members to feel safe within the group and to help one another with areas of difficultiy. the intention is to reduce anxiety so that all members are equal. If any member persistently contravenes any one of these principles, then the group has the right to agree a suitable outcome. Whilst no specific outcome is pre-decided, each instance will be judged on circumstances and seriousness. The group will have the final say in this matter.'
Oddly, although we're all supposed to have signed up to those rules when we joined the group, I certainly wasn't told about them before going to the group. Does anybody think they can explain something to me, please? Given the rules about 'respect' & 'consideration', isn't it obvious that somebody must be appointed to decide if we are doing those or not? Yet it doesn't say who! It's to be decided by 'the group'. If that means the members, why is any of them to think they can tell if any others are doing them or not? If any other members are supposed to think that, presumably I'd also be supposed to? Only I can't tell, so that's the (usual) problem there. If not, it doesn't say who is. There's no actual reason given to suppose the group 'leader' can tell such things (that's not their 'expertise') Course, it's the same old routine. Everybody else does think they can tell if I am treating them with respect & consideration. But, when I ask about them, they can't be explained & I'm 'negative' to want to do them better or to want to understand them!
