Monday, October 17, 2011

Aaaand a Reply

I will follow up with [so and so] and get back with you (sic)

Second time is the charm apparently.  The above is the response to nearly identical paragraphs, the first sent September 19 and the second sent yesterday.  In between, there have been a half dozen instances of Amy waiting hours for her take-as-needed meds.

And minutes later, another reply:
Regarding [House Head] and Amy being in counseling sessions together, there is a misunderstanding. I wrote that [House Head] is responsible for finding her a counselor and arranging her care- for them to be in counseling together,

All the issues and concerns that you have I am suggesting that a face to face meeting is held.

Please let me know when you are available 

What I misunderstood was this:
So I am wondering how to resolve this issue if [House Head] “terrifies” Amy and has to work with the counselor, talk with Amy about her concerns and address them. 

I had no idea what it meant, but thought it suggested counseling.  Apparently not.  And regardless, joint counseling IS what the situation calls for.

I feel sick thinking about scheduling this meeting.  For one, I live three hours away, so if I'm going to drive up for something other than person to person party time with Amy, I want to know its going to be a productive meeting.  And two, I know that have one meeting is the start of us having meetings meetings meetings.  My mom was hostage to these meeting where staff stomp feet and say that everything is Amy's fault/Amy's misunderstanding.

Allow me to stomp my feet for a second.  YOU WORK FOR AMY, staff!  YOU are paid with her state and federally allocated funds in exchange for providing her care.  If Amy is misunderstanding you, I suggest you be more clear that you not abusive jerk who is irritated by her need for care.

Gahhhh!  It's only 9 AM.


Post a Comment