In the context of peer relationships, the dynamic often encompasses the roles of both pacifier and controller, with an overarching theme of negotiation. The realm of health economics underscores the significance of effective relationships, as it necessitates constructive communication between two or more parties to achieve desired outcomes. The following exercise probes into these intricate dynamics.
“Reflect on an experience when you found yourself predominantly in the role of a pacifier or a controller, and delve into your thoughts, emotions, and the insights gleaned from this experience and the session today. Consider how these reflections will shape your role as a peer.”
For the most part, I find myself occupying a middle ground, not entirely a pacifier or a controller, but more aptly a negotiator. On careful reflection, I acknowledge that I tend to lean slightly towards the controller side of the spectrum. However, it is essential to underscore that human interactions are seldom dichotomous; I have, at different points in my life, assumed roles as a pacifier, a controller, and a negotiator, depending on the specific situation and context.
In social settings, I have, at times, adopted a more direct and assertive approach, addressing issues head-on, and ensuring that clear agreements are reached with individuals I may have been in conflict with. I have always sought to establish a mutual understanding of where each party stands and where the boundaries are set. Reflecting on the insights from our session, I now comprehend the significance of clearly defining boundaries in relationships. However, these boundaries should ideally be negotiated jointly by both the peer and the peer support worker. This negotiation process is crucial for establishing relational safety, emotional safety, and physical safety.
In my role as a peer supporter, my aim is to engage in effective communication with the peer. This entails understanding any issues they might be experiencing and collaboratively determining the boundaries to be established, ensuring that both parties have a shared comprehension of their positions. Recognizing changes in boundaries is essential, as it enables us to comprehend any shifts, breaches, or clear violations, and to take appropriate actions in response.
The session provided a fascinating exploration of the boundaries of fellow trainees, illuminating what they considered acceptable and unacceptable. The exercise of playing devil’s advocate proved to be a valuable tool, enabling us to appreciate diverse perspectives and situations where boundaries may flex and adapt. It was apparent that not all scenarios are black and white; therefore, the intention behind one’s actions as a peer supporter must always align with the best interests of the peer.