Preview Mode Links will not work in preview mode

Aphasia Access Conversations


How We’re Reducing Communication Barriers

Aphasia Access Conversations brings you the latest aphasia resources, tips, and aha moments from Life Participation professionals who deliver way more than stroke and aphasia facts. Topics include aphasia group treatment ideas, communication access strategies, plus ways for growing awareness and funds for your group aphasia therapy program. This podcast is produced by Aphasia Access.

Jul 25, 2023

Interviewer info

Lyssa Rome is a speech-language pathologist in the San Francisco Bay Area. She is on staff at the Aphasia Center of California, where she facilitates groups for people with aphasia and their care partners. She owns an LPAA-focused private practice and specializes in working with people with aphasia, dysarthria, and other neurogenic communication impairments. She has worked in acute hospital, skilled nursing, and continuum of care settings. Prior to becoming an SLP, Lyssa was a public radio journalist, editor, and podcast producer. 

In this episode, Lyssa Rome interviews Kate Meredith about using concepts from family and systemic psychotherapy to help people with aphasia and their families. 

 

Guest info

Kate Meredith is a Family and Systemic Psychotherapist, working for the NHS and in independent practice in South Wales. She is completing a Professional Doctorate in Systemic Practice.


Kate worked for 15 years as a Speech and Language Therapist, working with adults with acquired communication difficulties. Kate's dual training enables her to support families and individuals with the impact of these changes on family and social relationships.

Kate has studied at University College London, King's College London and the University of Bedfordshire. Kate worked with Giles Yeates to publish Psychotherapy and Aphasia: Interventions for Emotional Wellbeing and Relationships (Meredith, Kate. H. and Yeates, Giles. N. 2020). Kate also presented at the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association International Convention in November 2022.

 

Listener Take-aways

In today’s episode you will:

  • Describe the importance of narrative for helping families cope with aphasia.
  • Understand how speech-language pathologists can use genograms and ecomaps to support their LPAA care.
  • Learn why the way speech therapists talk about aphasia matters.

Edited show notes

Lyssa Rome  

Welcome to the Aphasia Access Aphasia Conversations Podcast. I'm Lyssa Rome. I'm a speech language pathologist on staff at the Aphasia Center of California, and I see clients with aphasia and other neurogenic communication impairments in my LPAA-focused private practice. I'm also a member of the Aphasia access podcast working group. Aphasia Access strives to provide members with information, inspiration, and ideas that support their aphasia care through a variety of educational materials and resources.

 

I'm today's host for an episode that will feature Kate Meredith. Kate is a family and systemic psychotherapist, working for the NHS and in independent practice in South Wales. She is completing a professional doctorate in systemic practice.


Kate was a Speech and Language Therapist for 15 years, working with adults with acquired communication difficulties. Her dual training enables her to support families and individuals with the impact of these changes on family and social relationships.

Kate has studied at University College London, King's College London, and the University of Bedfordshire. Kate worked with Giles Yeates to publish Psychotherapy and Aphasia: Interventions for Emotional Wellbeing and Relationships. Kate also presented at the ASHA convention in November 2022.

 

Kate Meredith, welcome to the podcast. I'm so glad to be talking with you.

 

Kate Meredith   

Thank you for having me. I'm really glad to be here.

 

Lyssa Rome   

So to start with, I'm curious about your transition from speech language pathology, or speech language therapy, into family therapy. What led you to make that change?

 

Kate Meredith   

So I loved working as a speech language therapist or a speech language pathologist, as you would say in the US. It was great. I mainly worked in a rehabilitation setting, and what that enabled me to see, from the off, was the changes to people’s relationships. On a daily basis, I was witnessing people coming into the center, trying to figure out who they were in relationship to each other, and that got me really, really curious. The more I thought about it, the more I thought about the ask that we put on partners and family members in those settings—so whether it’s supporting people with toileting or washing, feeding or swallowing, there’s so much change that takes place. 

 

And it really made me think: What about the relationships? Are we asking about the change in relationships? Are we asking what it feels like for partners to have different roles, to have different aspects to the way they do their relationships? And as a speech language therapist, I was thinking: Okay, what does this person need in terms of their communication skills, what do they need on the ward? Do they need to be able to indicate whether they’re hungry or thirsty or in pain? And all of that was important. But it also kept me thinking: What would matter most to me? If I were in this situation, if I had aphasia, if I was having difficulties with my communication, what would be the biggest impact for me? And it just kept coming back to relationships for me. 

 

Now, I worked in the multidisciplinary team, with neuropsychologists and physios and OTs, nurses, healthcare support workers, doctors—great, great teams. But I wasn't sure that any of us really felt like we had the remit or the focus to think about people's relationships after brain injury. 

 

When I was working in the community for a while, I started working with a neuropsychologist, who started asking questions about this with a couple that I was working with alongside him. And I said to him afterwards, “I loved those questions. I'm so glad you're asking those questions. I think about this all the time.” And he said, “Well, I wasn't doing neuropsychology there, I was doing family therapy.” So I started looking into it. And when I started exploring it, and when I got onto the course, straightaway, I thought, I think that speech and language therapists, speech language pathologists have got a really unique set of skills here that matches so well with the skills that are needed in family and systemic psychotherapy. 

 

So starting the training, loved the training straightaway. And I always hoped that I'd be able to do something and brain injury with it, but then, when I found a job in family therapy, in a different context, actually, working with children, adolescents in mental health services, I kind of started down that direction, and love it. But I've really held on in my private practice, where I'm not working as a speech language therapist anymore. But most of my private practice work is with adults who have a communication disorder. And I find that so enriching. I just love it. And I also do a little bit of writing a little bit of presenting. And that's kind of where I got to here.

 

Lyssa Rome  

It sounds like you very organically saw this connection between what families, people with acquired brain injuries and acquired communication disorders were dealing with, and how family and systemic therapy might be able to help them live better with their conditions. So I want to back up for a moment and ask you to define for us what is family and systemic therapy for, say, SLPs, who aren't familiar with that term?

 

Kate Meredith  

Absolutely, because I wasn't either. I think it's more popular in certain contexts of healthcare than in others. So in the UK, it just wasn't in brain injury anywhere. So I'd never heard of it. There are different names for family and systemic psychotherapy—so some people call it systemic psychotherapy, some people call it family therapy, sometimes it's a mixture, which doesn't really help with the difficulties that people have in understanding what it is. But really what it is, is about helping people who are in relationships with each other, work together to achieve change. The idea being that change happens through relationships, rather than individuals just making a change that can that can affect everything. 

 

The big principle of it is really that problems aren't located in people. Problems and people are not the same thing. People don't just have ownership or become the problem, they very often happen between people. So who takes responsibility for that change, if actually, the problem is happening between two people, or more than two people? 

 

So family and systemic psychotherapy thinks about actually how relationships can support people, and how improving relationships can reduce problems and can reduce symptoms. So we're trying to provide a really safe space in family therapy and systemic psychotherapy, where people can communicate, they can make efforts to understand each other in a different way. We can think about strengths—it's very, very strengths based—but also about what the needs are, what the emotions are, and how people can be a resource for each other. So rather than thinking, you need to go and get this fixed, or you need this medication, it's actually: What can happen in the relationships that will bring about the change?

 

Lyssa Rome 

That brings to mind a really interesting conversation that I was able to have, as part of this podcast, several episodes ago, with Dr. Marie-Christine Hallé, who really emphasized this idea that aphasia is a family thing, it's not something that just happens to the person with aphasia, and what you're describing, this idea of locating the problem, sort of outside of the person with with the brain injury and situating it within the family context, I think, is a really powerful way to think about it. 

 

So you've been bringing these ideas from family therapy to speech language therapists, speech language pathologists, working with people with communication disorders. And today, our plan is to talk some more about some of these concepts from family or systemic therapy that can be useful for SLPs, who are working, particularly within the Life Participation Approach to Aphasia. So can you say a little bit more about what you've been doing to bring these ideas to SLPs?

 

Kate Meredith  

Yeah, absolutely. So for me, this is this is really exciting. What I really want to help people understand, I guess, a lot of people do already, but actually, if relationships are what matters to the person, we're working with, then that's everyone's business. You know, we don't need to think of it as being something that we don't have the right to ask about. So of course, you can always train as a family and systemic psychotherapist. But as a speech and language pathologist, there are also many other things that you can do to support people's relationships after brain injury and with aphasia. And the feedback that I get from clients I work with now, from clients I've worked with in the past, is that it's really helpful to have someone who understands neurology, who understands aphasia and what can support communication alongside the permission in those sessions to make the relationships the focus. So this is really important for people, really meaningful for people. So what I guess I'm trying to do is get that message out there—make this your business, because we've got the skills.

 

Lyssa Rome  

I first became aware of your work with your presentation at ASHA in November 2022, and you talked about ways that speech therapists could make it our work. Specifically, you talked about—one of the things you talked about—was narrative therapy, and the power of stories to help people make sense of their situation and to shape their reality. We've touched on this earlier, but part of that had to do with this idea of externalizing the communication disorder, in this case, the aphasia. So I wondered if you could go into that a little bit more for us.

 

Kate Meredith  

Absolutely. It's one of my favorite approaches. So I'd be delighted to talk more about it. So narrative therapy is based in a kind of philosophy of social constructionism, which I won't go into too much here. But essentially, it's kind of an epistemology, or a way of understanding knowledge that underpins the doctorate I'm doing. And it really kind of lends itself to thinking about truth as being a product of social processes, rather than there being one objective truth. So that gets a bit philosophical. 

 

But essentially, what we're thinking about here is that when we are in conversation with each other, which is largely language-based, our conversations support the beliefs that we have and our views of the world. And these events that we are in conversation talking about, they are subjectively perceived. And we link those together into stories that make sense to us. But they're rarely the whole story. 

 

Those of us who have the power to tell these stories, to talk about events and the way that we see them, those of us that have got the loudest voices, the most power, we get to shape the stories that get told and retold. And that, in social constructionist terms, means that we get to shape truth, and we get to shape reality and how it's shared in our communities, which is a privilege that not everyone has. 

 

When we when we do this we see, in narrative therapy we believe, that the stories that fit get retold. They become very dominant. They become the dominant narratives in our societies and in our communities. And the stories that don't fit with that dominant narrative get lost. We would call those subjugated narratives. Now, when I was learning about this in my first year of training in systemic psychotherapy, I just had this epiphany, this kind of light bulb moment of, what does this mean for the people I've just left on the ward and have aphasia, and in the most literal sense, don't have a voice. It just really kind of lit off so many sparks in my brain. 

 

So really thinking about the place of power in this and and how people with aphasia don't get a chance to input into certain stories. I think that we can all probably think about stories that have been told about us in the past that don't really fit for us very well—it might be that we're a rubbish driver, it might be that we're really scatty or that we're selfish or that we're cranky in the morning. You know, there's lots of stories that we don't particularly like that might get told about us. And can we challenge those? Can we give an alternative version and say, well actually is not quite the whole truth and do remember this time? And actually that happened once or twice, but I have been driving for I don't know 30 years or whatever it is. If we can challenge those, then we get to kind of address that narrative and have an influence over it. But if we can't challenge those narratives about us, then we feel less well. We feel subjugated by that. 

 

So I really started to think: Well, what are the options that are available to somebody with aphasia to tell the stories that fit for them? And how as speech and language pathologists do we support them to develop a rich narrative that fits more, that is more congruent with who they are and how they see themselves? So narrative therapy is all about this. Narrative therapy has got a series of kind of parts to it. Essentially, the first thing we're doing is hearing the problem and whatever form people can communicate that to us. We're listening, we're validating, and we need to stay with that. We need to stay with that part of the process before moving on. And when we're doing that, we're thinking about the language that people are using, the way that they're expressing it, because these things are really important later on. 

 

The externalization part of that is about separating the problem out from the person. So the problem and the person are not the same thing. That is absolutely essential as a belief in narrative therapy. And there's some parts of healthcare where that works really well already—that's established. So if we think about cancer care, we don't call people “cancerous.” But yet we call people “aphasic.” So what happens to somebody's identity when they are called “aphasic”? It sounds like, to me that's kind of becoming quite a big part of who they are. And so it's about tending to the language we're using, when we're talking about an aspect of a person or an aspect of an illness that they have had, that then affects their communication with others, rather than making them the problem. 

 

So I want to know: How can we make this routine in brain injury services and aphasia services? How can we talk about, “Oh, yeah, the aphasia—the aphasia happens between the two of you.” “The aphasia gets in the way when you two are trying to communicate.” “The aphasia makes it difficult for us to understand you and your needs, and what matters to you,” rather than, “Your aphasia” or “You as an aphasic.” You know, I know that language is moving on and, and I'm sure that that people are adjusting to making changes with this already. But I think it's really, really important that we think about how can we really relocate that problem from being something that is within the person to something that is cropping up between people.

 

Lyssa Rome  

I think that's such a powerful idea. And after I heard you speak at ASHA, I started paying more attention to the way I was talking about aphasia, and where aphasia would get in the way, or how aphasia impacted, say, someone's ability to write a grocery list or to communicate with a child. There's something I think quite powerful about the ability to name it as separate from the person. It's different than I think, what I sometimes hear, which is people sort of blaming themselves for the communication breakdown or for the difficulty. So sometimes you'll hear people say, under their breath, like, “Oh, I’m so stupid,” or that sort of thing. And I think that when we say, “Ugh, aphasia is really getting in the way here, right?” That's, that's a little bit of a different message for people to hear, or maybe for people to tell themselves.

 

Kate Meredith  

Yeah, it really thinks, to me, it speaks to me about who takes responsibility for that and who takes responsibility for the change. And if somebody is already experiencing this in every part of their lives, do we also make them responsible for owning it and, and managing it, and making amends for it. Yeah, that's a lot to put on someone.

 

Lyssa Rome   

So what are some ideas for how SLPs might use these narrative techniques to give them, or people that they're working with, a sense of having influence over aphasia? What kind of questions can we ask people with aphasia and their significant others?

 

Kate Meredith   

So this part of it, I find this really fun work. Okay, so what we're doing here is we're essentially giving aphasia a character. And we're doing that through making the person that we're talking with, the person who has the brain injury, the expert. Their expertise really gets raised here, because they're the one that understands it the best. So we're working with them to say, “Okay, let's understand more about this aphasia.” We could call it aphasia, or you might give it a different name. Now, the names can get a little bit profane. 

 

Essentially, what would people call this thing that is coming along and disrupting their lives? What name do they want to give it? What does it look like to them? Do they have a vision of it? What does it sound like? Does it sound like noise and static? Does it have a color? Does it feel like it's this kind of black thing kind of approaching them? Is it big? Is it small? Does it have a shape? And what does it say? Does it say those things that you hear people saying, “Oh, I'm so stupid?” “Oh, I should have got that right.” “Oh, this is…?” Does it put words into people's minds? “You're stupid, you can't manage this situation. If I was you, I wouldn't even go out today, because you're not going to succeed at anything.” 

 

There might be things that it’s saying to the people that we're working with that get into their narratives. So can we be curious, first of all? “Tell me more about this—what that looks like, what it sounds like, what it says to you, and how can I understand that better?” And we might be doing that most effectively in a session with one or two of their family members there as well. So they can really listen in and think, “Okay, I've got my experience of it. And this is their experience of it. And wow, I'm understanding this in a really different way now.” 

 

So then we can start to think about the influence of the problem on people and on relationships. So what does it do? How does it get in the way? How does it disrupt? Does it provoke frustration? Does it provoke anger? Does it make you feel isolated? Lonely? Does it provoke other people to engage in behavior that you find really patronizing? So can we understand what does it do that really affects your life and your relationships? 

 

Then we can start to think about its presence. So when is it most present in your relationships? What helps it to successfully disrupt your communication together with the people that you care about? So it might be, “First thing in the morning, when I'm really tired, it's everywhere. And I can't do anything without it tripping me up.” Or, “It's okay in this situation. But actually, in these situations, when someone's trying to rush me, and I've got a queue of people behind me, then it's just there, shouting in my ear, saying, ‘I told you, you couldn't be in this situation, you may as well go home.’” So really thinking about where are the contexts where it's most present, most visible, most disruptive? 

 

Now, an interesting part of this process is finding out whether or not aphasia might also have some benefits to it. Because the problems we have in our lives often do have some useful side effects. Not always, but it's worth being curious about that. So if aphasia had any benefits to it, what would they be? And some examples of that might be “I can just not worry about my emails anymore. You know, emails were always really stressful to me. And now, you know, my partner's told everybody, look, don't email them, speak to them on the phone. And that's great, because actually, that used to be something that really used to stress me out.” So it's worth kind of just exploring, kind of with a bit of playfulness. Is there anything good about this? Does it do anything useful for you? 

 

The important part or another important part of this process, is looking at what we call the relative influence. So by this stage, we've understood a lot more about what the problem does to people what the problem does to relationships. But actually, the relative influence is what influence we as people have on the life of the problem. So here, we're not just thinking—this is crucial—we're not just thinking about the person with the aphasia, but actually, everybody around them. How can everybody influence aphasia? So when is at least present? We've heard a bit about when it's most present, but when is it least present? When is it hardly even noticeable? And this is often to do with people having stepped up. 

 

So what happens to aphasia when John writes down key words for Millie? Does aphasia get a bit smaller? Does it get a little bit less troublesome? What happens when Angela puts her phone down to look at her dad and talk to her dad? Does aphasia find that something that it doesn't like quite so much because it can't quite have its own way? What happens when David gives Phil time to finish rather than interjecting? So are these things that start to reduce the power that aphasia has to disrupt? 

 

When we're doing this, we're looking for other people to think about their agency over aphasia. So it doesn't feel like a massively oppressive problem in all circumstances and in all contexts. But we're thinking about the unique outcomes that can be threaded together. So actually, most of the time, it's awful, but when that happened the other day that it didn't really feel like it was around, or it felt a lot smaller. Okay, so let's start to thread this together. And let's start to think about other stories that we can tell that are healthier. And through that, we identify the actions that people can take, the tools that they have to reduce the power of aphasia. But again, crucially, not just the person with aphasia, the person with aphasia and everyone else. So we can think about how power is produced when everyone learns aphasia’s ways, and uses their tools as a collective, as an army, as an uprising, to fight the power of aphasia. 

 

Now, we have speech language therapists, speech language pathologists, have got so many tools, with working with families working with conversation partners, to really say, “These are your weapons against it. These are the things that you guys are already doing. But if you can do that more, if you can do that in that context, and that context, if you can do that here in the aphasia center, and at home and in the shop, then actually aphasia is going to start to think, ‘Okay, I don’t really have much of a place here. I'm not so welcome here.’” And it's going to get less powerful. And we can draw attention to that. We can thread it together. So it's not, “Okay, you know, John's aphasic. And he can't really communicate with anyone.” It's “Aphasia tries to get in the way of John and his family and John and his friends. But this is a really skilled group of people on guard for that. And they are equipped with so many skills and tools, working as a team to make sure that aphasia does not disrupt their relationships.” And that's enormously empowering for people.

 

Lyssa Rome   

Yeah, it's a big shift. What you're describing makes me think about how people in relationship are dealing with aphasia, and how the reciprocity of communication, and that back and forth, might promote resilience with aphasia. And I'm wondering how we as SLPs can help people foster that resilience.

 

Kate Meredith  

So resilience is such an interesting concept when we think about it in any walk of life. And there's so much different research into it. And I was looking into this a lot when I did my family therapy training, my dissertation was really around kind of partner coping when their partner has a communication disorder. So what helps people to cope and what helps people in relationships to feel resilient? And the reading I was doing at the time showed me that interpersonal relationships really influence resilience. 

 

There was a paper by Roland, which was saying that actually, couples who can communicate openly, directly, and sensitively can better cope with chronic disorders. So what does this mean for groups of people that we work with in speech and language therapy and pathology, where open, direct, sensitive, reciprocal communication is less possible? And this is really where SLPs come in with their skill set. Because we need to understand, I believe, how people are managing. I think we need to start having those conversations—what's going on with renegotiation around the boundaries in this family around where the illness has its impact, about how they find a balance in their relationships that suddenly might be really skewed from where it was beforehand. In family therapy, we're really curious about people's understanding of each other's needs, of their strengths, and of their different perspectives on it. 

 

So I guess when we're thinking about open and reciprocal communication, we can have ideas about supported communication. But we can also have a think about actually, what is it like to, to slow it down and to really be thinking, what are our different perspectives on this issue? How do we have a session that is supported by an SLP—somebody that's just taking it slowly and saying, “What is this like for both of you? How do you feel you're managing with this? What are your different ideas about this?” We can be there, supporting the person with the aphasia, to share their perspective, to share their worries. And it's the quality of that that can really, really lead to people feeling that we are open with each other. 

 

It's not about the ease of the quick communication, necessarily, of: “What we're going to have for dinner tonight? And can you phone so-and-so?” It's about: “How we both feeling about this? How are we going to support each other? There's this idea about, you know, me helping you with personal care. What does that feel like for you? Does that feel okay for you? Would you rather someone else did it, so we protect our relationship in a different way? How can I understand your perspective? And how can you understand my perspective?” For me, that's the quality of that communication, that we can really have a part in making more sensitive, making more open, which I think can directly feed into people's resilience. 

 

There are other ways that we can think about resilience, which is about the protective factors that they have as part of them or in their environment or in their relationship. And we can do a little bit of work around that—”What is it that that you do to help you manage at this time?” So then might be emotion-oriented coping mechanisms. Some of those can be healthy, some of those can be unhealthy. So we might be thinking about faith, we might be thinking about denial. There's problem-oriented coping mechanisms, where people might think about giving up work to help manage the kind of care package of their partner. But obviously, that can have its implications with social isolation and financial resources. There's problem-solving coping mechanisms where people might seek social support, or take on different roles that were previously held by the person with a brain injury. 

 

But we need to, I think, be curious about this. What are you doing that's helping you through this time? What ideas do you have about the future and how you guys are going to manage? Because we know that sometimes people can do things with the best intentions. So partners have been found in the past to isolate themselves from social networks to avoid placing their partner into difficult or embarrassing situations. And we might be curious about that and thinking: Okay, yeah, we can see what the intentions are there. And that sounds like you're really holding them in mind. What will that do to you and your resilience, if actually, your social network kind of closes down? 

 

So there aren't necessarily the right answers. And that's another kind of value, I guess, in family and systemic psychotherapy. We're not necessarily there to give the answers. We're there to ask the questions. We're there to be curious. Because generally, our belief is that people come up with their best solutions that fit them, that fit their context. But what we might do is ask the questions that help them to feel: Here's somebody interested in this, here's somebody that can help me to work this through with my partner, by being there, supporting the communication. And that can be a really valuable extension of our role that people might find more meaningful than maybe other things that we do.

 

Lyssa Rome  

So it sounds like you're describing resilience as also something that's sort of based in and fostered by relationships. One of the ideas that really stood out to me in the presentation you did at ASHA was about how speech therapists could use diagrams and maps of relationships and systems to help them understand the context that aphasia exists in, right, the people who are dealing with aphasia, and so I'm wondering if you could tell us a little bit more about using diagramming within our practice?

 

Kate Meredith 

Absolutely, I think this is one of those quick wins that SLPs can kind of start to implement kind of really, really quickly if they're so inclined. So genograms and ecomaps are two tools that I started using really, really quickly when I was training as a family therapist, but still working as a speech and language therapist. And they're slightly different. But essentially what they do is kind of map out the context for communication, map out the context for relationships. 

 

So genograms we tend to think of—they’re better known as family trees. So you might have seen these in other books and other contexts. But essentially, we use normally circles for women and squares for men and different shapes for people that don't identify as either. And we kind of map it out according to at least three generations. So you have symbols for each member of the family, and lines to connect them in their different family groups and generations. And what we do there is we map out the structure of the family. So we understand who's in the family and, and where do they live and how often do you see them. But also we can start to think about the quality of relationships. So in systemic psychotherapy, we draw lines between relationships. So you might have two or three lines between the people that are really, really close. And then you might have some squiggly lines between the relationships where there's conflict. 

 

So it helps us to understand, okay, where are where are the people that we're working with in the context of their family relationships? Which relationships are going well? We can also put significant dates on there, separations, illness is really useful to put on there—physical illness, mental illness. How well is this family doing at the moment? What is this new injury, or this kind of developing illness mean to this family? And if we're thinking about their conversation partner as being kind of their key support, potentially their partner, actually what else is going on in their family, because most of us have got something going on in our family. I think I fell into the trap very often as a speech language therapist, thinking: Oh, I bet this wife will be delighted when I say, “By the way, I can stay late tonight, if you want to come in, and we'll do a conversation session with you and your husband.” Without thinking: I wonder what else this woman has on in her life and how this will fit for her?

 

So it helps us to understand a little bit more about what's going on for that family at this point in time and how this fits. It also helps us to understand if we ask questions, things about the family scripts, the things that get handed down the generations. “We are a family who grin and bear it and get on with life and don't grumble.” Or, “We're a family where bad things always happen to us. And this was always going to happen.” What are the stories that we tell about ourselves as a family? This can be really informative for us as therapists to be thinking: Is this to them feeling like another example of that? Or actually, are they ready to challenge that family script? Or do they have a really positive family script? “We're survivors, we find ways to make stuff work.” “No matter what happens, we're going to stick together.” It's really interesting to ask people about the stories that get told about their family and, and what gets handed down in a really positive way. And what gets handed down in a way that doesn't feel okay, and maybe it's time to think about doing something differently. 

 

So those genograms kind of map out the significant relationships within the family, which can be really helpful for us as speech language therapists to think about. Okay, who are the key communication partners here, and what is the meaning of the illness or the meaning of the aphasia for this family? So that's kind of one way of doing it. 

 

There's another way of doing it, which sometimes, I'd almost recommend starting with, because maybe it fits better for a lot of people in the way they live their lives these days, where it's less centered on the family and the different generations, and more about our social networks. And I'm not necessarily talking about online social networks here, I'm talking about wider social networks. So the tool that I'm thinking about here are called ecomaps. And what we do with ecomaps is we draw a bit of a map of the family and their social systems and their professional systems. And we do that by drawing a circle in the middle with the person we're working with, and their immediate family, or household in that circle. And then around them, we draw more circles. And that can be as many as is relevant—a circle for each system that they are engaged with. So it might be the two partners, if it's two partners, each their work context. If there's kids, it might be their school. There might be adult friends. There might be kids’ friends. There might be sports teams, book clubs, neighbors, other family groups. We can start to think, okay, all of these people interact with this family on a weekly basis or monthly basis. 

 

And we can put ourselves on there. Now coming into this, there's a rehab team, or a speech language pathologist or a psychologist or social worker. We can start to kind of put ourselves on there as well. And we can have bigger and smaller circles related to kind of how present those systems are in the family's life. I think what can be really interesting is looking at how much space we take up in somebody's life sometimes, particularly in the acute stages or early on in rehab. Actually, work might have shrunk down to a tiny, tiny circle, whereas it used to be something that somebody did 40 hours a week. And actually now we take up 40 hours a week if they're on an inpatient ward, or even more. Things get really skewed. We become really big in people's lives and that might be quite complicated for people. 

 

But what we can do is start use the lines that I talked about earlier in genograms—the straight lines for closeness the squiggly lines for conflict, again, between that that group in the middle and the different systems around them. What's going well here? What is really shrinking down but we don't want it to? We want that to be bigger, that meant something to us, and at the moment, it doesn't have any space because all these other systems are involved. Where is it that actually, we can say, “Okay, right now, yes, having all the support from the speech language pathologist is really great. We want that. But what would it look like in a year's time?” 

 

Doing these over time can be really important. If you had three of them, you might do an ecomap the year before the brain injury. What did family life look like? Who were the connections? Who were the networks? Right now what does it look like? And if we were to think in two years’, or three years’ or five years’ time, what would you like it to look like? Because that helps us to think about: Which are the systems that we really need to support this family to communicate with? And what would that communication goal be? What would be meaningful for that person? So if it's, “I really love my book club, they're a brilliant group of people, I want to stay engaged with them.” Okay. What does that mean for our communication goals together? How can we really make that important and prominent? 

 

So we can really set goals that are based very much on what will help this person to keep their network—that again, like you said before, feeding into those ideas of relational resilience. And meaning that actually, that social isolation, the people can really experience with aphasia, with people adjusting to aphasia and caregiving, we can say, actually, there are ways to keep these networks going if we think really carefully and really intentionally around what communication goals are needed for us to work on, but also how can we explain to these different systems about aphasia and its sneaky ways? And how can we help them to feel just as skilled in outwitting it and outsmarting it, as the family are hopefully beginning to feel?

 

 

Lyssa Rome

So as we begin to wrap up, I'm wondering what what would you like speech language pathologists who are listening to this to take away from what you've been sharing with us?

 

Kate Meredith   

I imagine that many speech language therapists listening to this will already have a load of these ideas. So I hope that they feel empowered to keep thinking this way, keep using these ideas. I, for my own practice, like to think: Okay, what would matter the most to me? If I was to have a stroke, if I was to have aphasia, what would matter the most to me? And I think that can be a helpful way to think. 

 

So my thinking is that actually, communication builds relationships, communication sustains relationships, and my relationships are the most important things to me in the world. But what if no one that I was working with in our health system was talking about the significance of aphasia in my relationships? I'd feel stuck. I'd feel like I didn't have anywhere to express that. So I would love speech language therapists would be thinking, I'm gonna ask, “How's this affecting your relationship? How are you doing with that? Who should we be bringing in? How can we understand that?” 

 

So curiosity underpins everything that family and systemic psychotherapists do. So be curious and be broad with your curiosity. Don't feel like there are limits that you've got to stick to. Feel free to ask, “So what's this doing to your relationship with your partner? How's that working for you? What are you worried about?” Because actually, when we can help people to say it, it feels more manageable. So I'd love people to think about that. 

 

I'd really encourage people to think about the concept of timeframes. So what were things like before? How are things now? Where are we going to? What to what place do they want to get to? Because actually, if we don't ask what things were like beforehand, we might never know that actually, they were just about to divorce. And then this happened, and now they feel stuck together. So, you know, ask, “How was your relationship before the stroke?” A lot of people will be doing this already. I don't want to patronize anyone. But I do want people to feel permitted—not that I'm here to give permission—but encouragement to ask these questions. So can we find out who the key conversation partners are, because that really makes us think about the key communication goals more broadly than our immediate context that we see them in. 

 

I'd also really like to think about change happening in relationships rather than change happening within the individual. So a great shooter I had recently said, you know, when people are traumatized, don't make them responsible, alone, for change. This is Robert Van Hennik. And I love this idea: Is it fair for us, in healthcare, in society, to say, “You, there, with aphasia, you need to change your communication so other people find it easier to to understand you.” How can we help families and societies and communities to understand the relational responsibility for aphasia and for managing aphasia? 

 

I also would really like people to have a think about the problem. So the way we talk about the problem gives the problem meaning. So what are the stories that we hear and we tell? And how can we help people with aphasia and their families and their networks to challenge the dominant stories that actually might not fit for them. Actually, there's a really lovely possibility there for joint working. There’s short training courses. And there's already a lot of kind of writing out there in systemic theory and practice and more writing coming through about the links with aphasia. 

 

Finally, I guess what I would say is a speech language pathologists, people listening to this, they're already uniquely skilled. And I don't think people understand how good they are at noticing and supporting communication. And that's what builds relationships. We're so proactive in reducing communication barriers, and we've got the opportunity, through our work with people, to really, really find out what matters to people, and help people, help relatives learn new ways of communicating. So don't underestimate everything that you have to offer, in expanding that to relationships, and the quality of relationships to do work that is more and more meaningful for the people that we work with.

 

Lyssa Rome   

Kate Meredith, thank you so much for talking with us. These ideas, I think are both very practical, and then also very empowering to think that as SLPs we can really think broadly and with curiosity about how we are supporting people and families as they deal with aphasia. So, thank you so much for talking with us today.

 

Kate Meredith   

It's been a real pleasure. I'm delighted to have been able to have this conversation with you.

 

Lyssa Rome   

And thanks also to our listeners. For the references and resources that were mentioned in today's show, please see our show notes. They're available on our website, www.aphasiaaccess.org. There you can also become a member of our organization, browse our growing library of materials, and find out more about the Aphasia Access Academy. If you have an idea for a future podcast episode, email us at info@aphasiaaccess.org. Thanks again for your ongoing support of Aphasia Access. For Aphasia Access Conversations, I’m Lyssa Rome.

 

 

 

References and Resources 

www.merediththerapies.com

kate.meredith@outlook.com

Headway https://www.headway.org.uk

Stroke Association https://www.stroke.org.uk

 

Aphasia Access Conversations Episode #97: Aphasia Is A Family Thing with Marie-Christine Hallé