Group Intervention Challenges and Solutions for Depression

Introduction

The prevalence of depression in today's society has necessitated the emergence of different measures by health practitioners and social workers. These measures help affected individuals overcome the challenges of depression. One highly effective strategy employed by social workers is the group peer support intervention program. This approach is believed to be exceedingly result-oriented, as it has, with verifiable results, helped many patients recover from depressive experiences. Attesting to the efficacy of peer support interventions for depressed people, Pfeiffer, Heisler, Piette, Rogers, and Valenstein (2010, p. 1), in their comparison between peer support and care-alone initiatives, reveal that "peer support interventions have the potential to be effective components of depression care." However, a group intervention community faces many challenges capable of altering the direction and effectiveness of peer support.

Common Challenges Experienced in Group Intervention Services

One key challenge an agency can face in group intervention is articulating the group's purpose. The thought of creating a group may be very motivating — having found a void to fill in society by assisting people with depression. However, challenges emerge when the agency must accurately identify the specific aim of the community. A group's structure must be formulated in a way that adequately meets the needs of its clients; otherwise, it will be difficult to effect the positive change desired by all parties involved.

One of the common lapses in group formulation is the lack of commonality among members. Commonality is needed to make members feel the need for one another, to work together toward a specific goal, and is essential to the development of a mutual aid system (Gitterman, 2003, p. 6). Without this clarity, the agency may experience ambiguities that lead to a lack of results and a loss of motivation to continue.

Another challenge faced by an agency running a group intervention for depressed people is coping with members who have difficulty participating fully in group activities and discussions. It is crucial that group members share their experiences and fears to help one another overcome challenges. However, some members, Gianino and Glick (2008, p. 281) observe, feel detached despite benefiting from the group's social supports, due to self-disclosure issues. At times, some clients may feel isolated during group activities, which can lead to withdrawal or even a relapse. Situations like this can discourage an agency or social worker and cause a setback to the group's objectives.

The challenges in group intervention programs are not limited to the agency alone; the community as a whole sometimes faces issues that can be perplexing to both the agency and the clients. A group intervention program is, by its very nature, a community-centered endeavor with the mandate to provide individual members access to remedy through a collective approach. As such, a psychiatric intervention community is an entity that can be impacted or impaired by any unhealthy circumstances it faces.

One obstacle commonly experienced by groups of this nature is what Gitterman (2003, p. 5) describes as an organizational obstacle. This may include loopholes in the agency's structures. When there is an inadequate provision — or absolute lack — of essentials, such as "lack of evening hours or the quality of services such as institutional food," the effect is mostly felt by the community as a whole. Another issue frequently faced by intervention communities is group size. While it is understood that a group constitutes many people, the number of members within a social intervention context can shape or undermine its overall success. Having too many people in a community might affect communication, openness, and the cohesion the group ought to enjoy. Gitterman (2003, p. 14) posits that a large community may be overstimulating and confusing to some depressed patients or the frail elderly, which may result in withdrawal or disruptive behavior. Timing is yet another challenge: failing to allocate sufficient time for meetings, or scheduling them at hours unsuitable for many members, can hinder the group as a whole.

A group intervention service is a three-pronged concept consisting of the agency, the community, and the clients who make up the group. Just as there are challenges within the agency and community contexts, there are also challenges peculiar to individual clients.

Prevalent among the difficulties faced by clients on a personal level is the issue of confidentiality. Intervention groups are set up in a way that requires members to share personal information with one another. However, clients might feel uncomfortable sharing secrets they consider too private. The possibility of having their private problems disclosed outside the community by fellow group members may cause them to become reserved. Differences in intervention needs present another client-level challenge. Some groups do not clearly classify the set of people who should constitute their membership. Having a mix of individuals with unrelated problems can end in frustration, conflict, or both. For instance, a client who considered himself as "just being nuts," as shared by Gitterman (2003, p. 12), was inappropriately placed in a group of recently released hospital patients who were still psychotic. The experience, the client relates, was both frightening and upsetting, and made him feel it was a waste of time to be there. Experiences like this cause clients to feel alienated and to lose a sense of belonging in the group.

Conclusion

From all indications, peer support intervention is one of the most effective ways of addressing traumatic and depressive experiences. A community of people fighting a similar challenge will not only benefit the affected individuals but will also reduce societal stigma, as members come to understand they are not alone in their struggle. However, a premium must be placed on clarity of purpose in a group setting in order to mitigate the potential challenges capable of undermining the overall goals of the community.

References

Dennison, S. (2008). Measuring the treatment outcome of short-term school-based social skills groups. Social Work with Groups, 31(3–4), 307–328.

Gianino, M., & Glick, A. (2008). Wearing two hats: Clinical and ethical implications of combining individual and group treatment. Social Work with Groups, 31(3–4), 273–287.

Gitterman, A. (2003). Group formation: Tasks, methods, and skills.

Pfeiffer, P. N., Heisler, M., Piette, J. D., Rogers, M. A., & Valenstein, M. (2010). Efficacy of peer support interventions for depression: A meta-analysis. General Hospital Psychiatry, 33(1), 29–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2010.10.002