@ B a d Blackwell Ltd. 1994, 108 Cowlcy Road, Oxford OX4 lJF, UK and 238 Main Street, Cambridge, M A 02142, USA The Howard Journal Vol33 No 2. May 94 ISSN 0265-5527

The Swansea Listener Scheme: Views from the Prison Landings

BRIAN DAVIES Senior Probation Officer, West Glamorgan Probation Service

Cropwood Fellow, Institute of Criminolou, University of Cambridge 1992-3

Abstract: The Swansea Listener Scheme is based on the belief that Samaritan principles of sympathetic listening can be applicd formally within a prison setting. Samaritans are ordinary people trained to befriend others in confidence, without administering advice or judgment. Ordinary prisoners can also befriend, within a confidential setting, those who feel vulnerable or suicidal. Trained and supported ty the Samaritans, the services of a volunteer Listener can mean the dqference between coping with prison, or simpb giving up. Since its inception at Swansea Prison in August 1991, the im’dence of recorded self-harm has been halved. This study, based on extended interviews with Listeners and staff, suggests that the implications of the scheme go well beyond the prevention of suicide, and have a positive effect on relationships between stag, prisoners and caring agencies within the community.

1990 was a traumatic year for both staff and prisoners at HMP Swansea. Two prisoners committed suicide; one of them was Phillip Knight aged 15 years, on remand for the alleged theft of a handbag. At that time he was the youngest person to commit suicide in a British prison. Media interest was therefore considerable, and implicit in the coverage was a concern regarding lack of care on the part of the staff at Swansea. The subsequent coroner’s court recorded a verdict of suicide, and praised the actions of staff. Many staff however, were left with a feeling of despair, and a determination to do even more for those in their care.

The prison response to Phillip Knight’s death could so easily have been to ‘close the gates and put up the barriers’. What happened was exactly the opposite. For the first time the views of prisoners were actively sought, (many of whom were feeling anger and frustration over his death). The prison also began the process of sharing concerns over suicide with its local community. Prisoners and representatives of the Magistracy and Board of Visitors joined forces to develop a more radical, innovative approach to the whole area of suicide prevention. Peter Raynor of the Applied Social Studies Department at Swansea University accepted an invitation to undergo an observation visit to the prison, and to the high dependency unit of the local psychiatric hospital. The intention was to cast a fresh pair of eyes on the process of reception, induction and location. His comments contributed greatly to the subsequent working party report and its accompanying action plan (Davies 1991).

125

Of particular relevance to the development of an inmate involvement scheme was the recommendation that:

Inmate watch schemes have a role to play, especially if the general awareness of suicidal behaviour amongst inmates has been brought to the forefront. (Davies, 1991, p. 8)

Of course, the role of prisoners as part of an informal strategy to combat suicide has long been recognised. Concerned fellow prisoners would often be the first to spot a distressed or suicidal prisoner, bringing it to the attention of a landing officer so that action could be taken. I t was the inclusion of prisoners as a formal part of the process that made the Swansea scheme so different and so challenging.

Principles Underlying the Scheme

The Swansea Listener Scheme is based on the belief that Samaritan principles of sympathetic listening can be applied within a prison setting. By 1991 the Samaritans were becoming a familiar sight in the prison both on the landings and as members of the Suicide Prevention Management Group. This was not, of course, peculiar to Swansea prison. Many prison governors were beginning to recognise the need to ‘share’ concern for distressed prisoners with those agencies which dealt with similarly distressed people in the community. The Samaritans describe themselves as ordinary people who are trained to befriend others in a confidential and supportive setting, without need for advice or judgment. The logical step would be for ordinary prisoners, suitably selected, trained and supported, to befriend those prisoners not so fortunate or skilled at coping with prison life. They called themselves ‘Listeners’ for that is what they were expected to do.

The prison culture actively encourages the need to ‘do your bird’ without involving others, but the Listeners were able to show that ordinary people were prepared to befriend, and to care. By August 1991 six prisoners had been carefully selected and trained to act as Listeners. The Swansea scheme had begun to develop as a supplement to the overall strategy for suicide prevention.’

Alison Liebling (1992) has highlighted the need for prisoners to be heard and understood:

Given a willing ear, inmates will indicate their own vulnerability. The only requirement is that the listening ear recognises and acknowledges these signs as signs of risk or valid cries for help. (p. 165)

The act of ‘creative listening’, a concept used by the Samaritans in their training sessions, can encourage those prisoners who feel helpless to help themselves, and those who want advice to obtain better from within themselves.

Method of Research

It is certainly not possible for the author to take an objective viewpoint on the Listener Scheme. Throughout the entire planning process, and for the

126 @ Basil Blackwell Ltd. 1994

first six months of operation, the author was the director of the scheme with an obvious personal interest in its success. The opportunity for extended research on the effectiveness of the scheme was provided through a 1992 Cropwood Fellowship at the Institute of Criminology, University of Cambridge.

This study was based on in-depth tape recorded interviews with all six Listeners and a sample of 20 members of prison staff selected randomly from departments within the prison. Four of the Listeners were based on the adult remand and convicted wings, whilst two were Rule 43 prisoners located in the segregation unit. The young offender wing was not represented, as it proved impossible to select a suitable candidate from this age group. However, the youngest Listener was only 21 years of age, and all four Listeners situated on ‘normal’ location were regularly called to the young offender unit to respond to individual cries for help. All staff ranks were represented, and a number of those interviewed were members of the Swansea branch of the Prison Officers’ Association. Two of those members of staff were female. The mix at Swansea is such that there are no staff members, and very few prisoners, from an ethnic minority background. One of the Listeners was a Welsh speaker, as were many of the staff members. The respondents provided a wide range of age and experience, both in terms of criminal careers, and the professional experience of staff. All those interviewed welcomed the opportunity to discuss further the issues raised by the Listener scheme.

Interviews took place in the prison during the Autumn of 1992, each lasting over 20 minutes. The intention was to examine opinions on the scheme from those people with a working knowledge of it. Semi-structured questionnaires were used as an aid to discussions (see Appendix), but the respondents were encouraged to describe in their own words any personal experiences of the scheme (both in terms of suicide prevention and the wider issues of relationships within prisons) and to suggest ways in which the scheme could be improved. Following interview the tapes were transcribed and field notes were recorded for analysis.

Is The Listener Scheme Working?

There can be no doubt that the scheme has contributed to a significant reduction in the number of attempted suicides. In the year up to March 1991 there were two suicides and 29 recorded instances of self-injury at Swansea. Since then, the number of recorded self-injuries has fallen by over 50% and there have been no deaths. There has also been a considerable reduction in the use of the strip cell, or ‘care room’. Instead those prisoners deemed to be seriously at risk now have the option to remain on ordinary location, with increased support from staff, Samaritans or Listeners, rather than being placed alone but under supervision in a cell situated in the hospital unit.

The reduction in attempted suicides cannot be wholly attributed to the Listener Scheme because many changes have occurred to the general strategy for preventing death and self-harm, for example, the introduction

127 @ Basil Blackwell Ltd. 1994

of card phones, improved reception procedures and the extended use of the Samaritans.* However, it is widely acknowledged that the scheme has played an important part in the changes that have occurred at Swansea.

Evaluation of practice often involves statistical analysis of one kind or another, but in this context such an analysis would not capture the essence of the scheme, and would certainly not reflect the rich findings which emerged from interviews. Instead the qualitative description that follows suggests that the effect of the Swansea Listener Scheme stretches well beyond the principal aim of supporting suicidal prisoners.

Listeners

The ideal-typical Listener would appear to have some or all of the following characteristics: general maturity, knowledge of the system (or jail craft), status with staff and within their peer group and a genuine concern for their fellow prisoners. Security and control aspects are also taken into account and a final right of veto is held by the governor.

I t was essential that all the Listeners were volunteers. Not all prisoners are anti-authoritarian within a prison setting; rather they may feel angry with themselves for acting foolishly or getting caught. The culture of a prison does little to encourage prisoners to put others before themselves, so it would be wrong to assume that Listeners represent the moral and social values of the prison population pm se. Listening could never be described as an easy task; unlike the Samaritans they are unable to finish their shift and go home. In many ways Listeners are on constant call for their services.

All six Listeners who were interviewed described positive changes and benefits to themselves as a direct result of the scheme. The essence of their feelings is contained in the following quotations:

I felt as if I was of benefit to the system, as opposed to the system being of benefit of me. (Listener 2)

I have become more aware of even the shortest sentence meaning more . . . and it makes me think yes, I have got problems the same as anyone else. (Listener 3)

The scheme has helped me because I have got something to do with my life, knowing that I can help somebody. At the end of the week I think, well, I didn’t do so bad this week. It makes me feel good. (Listener 2)

It is more difficult to determine whether or not their views towards other prisoners have changed. Being volunteers on the scheme they would describe themselves as caring people in any regard. One Listener’s views on Rule 43 prisoners is worth noting:

We have all got skeletons in our cupboards to a certain degree . . . we are all serving prisoners, and we have all got to live under the same roof. (Listener 1)

The fact that Listeners from both normal and Rule 43 units now share training and support sessions suggests a softening in attitudes. Prisoners on Rule 43 share their unit with prisoners on the punishment block - a

128 @ Basil Blackwell Ltd. 1994

recipe for trouble should they be allowed to associate freely together. However, Listeners do not feel confined to such traditional boundaries and often befriend those on discipline charges:

We do mix to a point. We are meant to be segregated from them, but I regard somebody in need of a Listener as being at his wits’ end. He needs a friendly face to talk to. (Listener 5, on Rule 43)

On the subject of ensuring an effective, and user-friendly induction process for new prisoners, one Listener made the comment:

If I had been able to speak to a prisoner when I came in, I would have felt safer. You don’t know what to expect when you come in here. I don’t care who it is, whether YOU are a sex offender or not, you worry whether you are going to be beaten and kicked and shoved, and even though you are not, it is still in your mind, and you are waiting for it to happen. (Listener 6, on Rule 43)

Listeners were also asked for their views on why prisoners commit suicide. The general consensus was that prisoners are mentally stable, but cannot tolerate their situation at particular times during incarcertion. Such views coincide with the current belief that most suicidal prisoners are more likely to be experiencing situational depression as opposed to clinical depression. Liebling (1992) puts it thus:

The most vulnerable inmates can often be found in the worst situations, many having no job or activity in prison and receiving very little contact from their families . . . it is the combined effects of hopelessness, their histories, the current situation and their inability to generate any solution to the problems that propel the young prisoner towards suicide. (p. 234)

Liebling’s comments on young prisoner suicides can be applied to the whole prison population. If prisoner suicide is much less of a psychiatric problem, and more to do with an inability to cope, then what better than for a distressed lonely prisoner to share his concerns with a Listener - someone who has coped with similar problems in the past, and who is continuing to find strategies for support?:

I think everybody at some stage or another through their life, will hit personal tragedy or loss, and will think of suicide. (Listener 3)

Feelings of personal tragedy come at different times and the situation can often be improved by a small demonstration that somebody cares:

When was sentenced to 12 years nobody thought he would be coming back to Swansea, so everything in his cell that belonged to the prison they took out. When he came back he did not have a T-shirt or even a pair of underpants. I was able to get him what he wanted, and I watched his face when I gave it to him, because he knew somebody cared . . . It made a hell of a difference, you know. (Listener 6, on Rule 43)

The notion of ‘care’ is tremendously important in a prison setting. Preventing suicides is synonymous with caring for prisoners. Any strategy of care for prisoners at risk should be multi-disciplinary so that full use can be made of all the human resources and skills available to an establishment. At Swansea this now includes Listeners.

1 29 @ Basil Blackwell Ltd. 1994

Do Listeners find it easy to demonstrate care and concern for their fellow prisoners?:

As a Listener you can see a dozen people in a week. It is like as if you are a delivery driver and you get back to the depot on a Tuesday and you off-load your returns. (Listener 3)

Tuesday refers to the weekly support sessions convened in the prison by the Samaritans, who fully appreciate the need for regular, confidential meetings. One Listener speaks with particular affection for ‘his’ Samaritan:

I don’t suppose she realises what it means to me on a Tuesday. I feel wonderful with them coming, and being able to sit down and tell them we have got no problems. It is good for her, but it is great for me. (Listener 6, on Rule 43)

The introduction of such a radical and innovative scheme was bound to have raised fears from some members of staff unaccustomed to the idea of sharing care and concern not just with the Samaritans but with prisoners. This was recognised, and understood by Listeners:

Initially it was opposed by a lot of staff, but I have noticed that even those who were joking about it initially now accept that it is part of their lot to see that the scheme goes into action. At the end of the day it has got to help them. If you have got a settled wing, staff have got less to do, people are not going to be harassing them for this, that and the other. They will settle down to a routine. (Listener 1)

I n a similar vein:

It is not only prisoners who get the tension, it is prison staff. The scheme has got to benefit both sides. (Listener 2)

It was vital, especially during the early days of the scheme, for Listeners to adhere to the rules of engagement. Any new initiative is prone to abuse, especially when the blurring of divisions can lead to accusations, from both sides, of prisoners ‘acting like members of staff. Listeners were informed from the outset that any abuse would lead to immediate dismissal from the scheme. One of the Listeners was found to be trafficking drugs from the reception area (where he worked) to the young offender unit. His crime was discovered by another irate Listener. A fight ensued, and the guilty partner immediately applied for self protection on Rule 43, before being transferred to another prison. Such action served to reassure staff that issues of security and control were still paramount, and prisoners that the scheme was too important to jeopardise. But staff did not appear to adopt an ‘I told you so’ approach. Their response was rather more philosophical:

Drugs are going to come in whichever way. We cannot stop it coming it, it’s virtually impossible, so whether it comes in with the Listeners on visits or whoever, it’s going to come in. (Discipline Officer, 5 years experience)

An experienced principal officer puts it another way:

Every now and again people are going to become Listeners for the wrong reasons, and they will get involved in drug trafficking. I see that as an acceptable risk in the whole business.

130

@ Basil Blackwell Ltd. 1994

A pragmatic approach to the Listener scheme is of course essential. When dealing with high-status prisoners well versed in jail craft, one cannot expect angelic behaviour. Minor misdemeanours by such prisoners have always been accepted in the knowledge that library orderlies, tea-boys and reception orderlies, carry out a useful control function on the prison landings. In a similar manner Listeners can be expected to bend the rules, but not to the extent where the scheme suffers.

Staff

The Swansea Listener scheme exists as a direct result of co-operation between staff, prisoners and the Samaritans. The ensuing partnership of effort developed ownership of, and pride in, the Swansea scheme. All staff interviewed expressed considerable satisfaction at the outcome, despite some initial reservations:

I must admit I was very sceptical at first. It sort of coincided with the abolition of SWIP officers and Bail Information officers. It just seemed another management way of taking away staff jobs and giving it to, well, it has been auxiliaries in the past, but now giving it to inmates. (Hospital Oficer, 6 years experience)

The reasons behind their current satisfaction with the scheme differ considerably:

Having sat through coroners’ courts, and been made aware of how staff were affected by suicide, anything that we did as a collective body of staff towards preventing suicide would certainly be a major step as far as we were concerned. (Senior Officer, 32 years experience, POA representative)

Prison staff now have ‘official permission’ to introduce an element of innovation into their work practices3 Of course it is one thing for Prison Department officials to come out with sensible and enlightened directives, but it is another to turn around a more traditional culture amongst officers and put such directives into daily practice.

So why has such an innovative and essentially risky scheme been so easily accepted by prison staff at Swansea? In one way, Swansea provided the ideal venue for such a scheme. The prison houses local people, mainly on remand or serving short sentences:

I guess it is because a person you discharge today can be standing next to you in Tesco’s tomorrow, and be back inside the following day. (Discipline Officer, 10 years experience)

There are, however, other reasons, which include an enlightened governor and POA executives, and careful planning and ownership of the scheme by those Listeners and staff who would have ‘hands on’ responsibility. When the scheme was shown to be working in terms ofa rapid decrease in self-injury, and when other prisoners, and of course the national media, were showing great interest, ownership turned to pride and a determination for the scheme to thrive:

It is one of the most positive steps I have ever seen in the Prison Service in all the time I have worked for it. (Principal Officer, 23 years experience)

131

@ Basil Blackwell Ltd. 1994

Relationships

I t is now recognised that relationships between staff and prisoners are a t the heart of any prison system and that security and control flow from the strength of that r e l a t ion~h ip .~ Prisons can never be run by coercion, they depend on a firm yet humane approach that encourages staff to do things with prisoners rather than to them. There are advantages for all concerned with such a caring approach:

I can point to an unmeasurable but a clearly different atmosphere that exists on the wing, not just amongst Listeners or just amongst prisoners, but amongst PEOPLE. It is a lot more positive. (Discipline Officer, 10 years experience)

A prisoner who becomes stressful is a potential suicide risk, but he is also a potential control risk. We are talking about the principle of being able to talk openly to relieve stress. . . . If a prisoner has talked it over with a Listener it creates a better atmosphere in the prison. (Governor-grade, 32 years experience)

Caring attitudes are obviously going to affect everyday practices within the prison, especially when dealing with a suicidal prisoner:

Fifteen months ago the set formula was to strip all his clothes off, chuck him into a dark room, give him a canvas romper suit and wait for him to get better. . . . I now have prisoners approaching me to say that ‘Jo Bloggs’ in his cell on A4 is upset, because they know I am NOT going to throw him into the dark room. (Principal Officer, 16 years experience)

So, prisoners experiencing suicidal feelings are not automatically stripped and isolated in the hope that they ‘get better’. They are increasingly being kept in their own cells and encouraged to share their problems with staff, Listeners or Samaritans. There are of course risks involved, as highlighted by the same officer:

Previously I had the weight of the rule book behind me, but this way I have to use my own judgment, taking into account advice from Listeners, staff and my own experience. But one of these days something is going to go wrong.

Is the risk significantly greater?

Hell, yes. If I make a judgment based on those elements I have just described, and something goes wrong, are my bosses going to say you have cocked this up completely - get out, or are they going to say, based on the information you received you made the best judgment on the spot?

I t is clear th:. t , far from being ‘just’ for prisoners, the Swansea Listener Scheme has also had a freeing effect on staff. They are increasingly prepared to listen to prisoners on a range of issues previously considered sacrosanct within the institution. O n e example of the sharing process follows:

We have now got a committee that I call a complaints committee. I t is a body of prisoners that I get together once a month, and they tell me what is wrong with the prison. One con said, ‘why do we have our main meal at lunch time and not tea time? We are going to be banged up for 12 hours with just a salad at tea time’. So

132 @ Basil Biackwell Ltd. 1994

now we are going to swap them round, with the main meal served at 4.00pm and not midday. (Senior Officer, 15 years experience)

Samaritans

This feeling of greater openness has of course extended beyond the prison walls. Agencies within the community also care about prisoners; they also have a vested interest in what happens to ‘their’ clientslpatientsl customers. I t costs the prison nothing to allow entry to the Samaritans - and to give them keys - and to learn from these ordinary people ways in which staff and prisoners can improve on their Listening and caring skills:

They (the Samaritans) were treated with a lot of suspicion a t first, from myself included. We saw them as outsiders, encroaching on our territory. Now we have worked closely with them, the work is certainly valued by the establishment. (Discipline Officer, 10 years experience)

I am not entirely convinced I can tell what suicidal prisoners are about. The beauty of the Listener scheme is that it has got very little to d o with us in terms of training. I would be in favour of maintaining the Samaritans in that role . . . they are the experts in that field. (Physical Education Instructor, 9 years experience)

Perhaps the greatest compliment both for the scheme and its link with the community comes from a discipline officer who sees the need for an extension in Listener activities:

I think all prisons could use this scheme. I think it should be for everyone. I t doesn’t have to be prisoners with problems. Sometimes I have problems, and I wish I could go and talk to someone. You want someone you can talk to in confidence, like a Listener or a Samaritan. (Discipline Officer, 7 years experience)

Violence in Prison

Situational factors - including the nature of the prison regime and the quality of relationships - also play a part in the level of violence within the prison. Boyle ( 1977) has highlighted the particular importance of staff- prisoner relationships when preventing, and trying to defuse, potentially violent incidents:

What made the (Barlinnie) unit unlike any other place was the way staff and prisoners were allowed and encouraged to sit down and talk together. This was the single most important factor of the unit. (p. 11)

Regimes which allow more inmate participation and which actively encourage an ‘open gate’ policy with community based agencies appear therefore to directly affect the levels of violence within prisons.

Although the Swansea research did not attempt to cover this particular area of concern, many of the comments made by Listeners and staff support the view that good relationships make for a peaceful prison:

The number of incidents of a more violent nature, not self-injury, have decreased. Generally the atmosphere on the wings is excellent, and the Listener scheme must contribute to it. . . . Personally speaking, the number of governor’s applications

133

@ Basil EIackwell Ltd. 1994

have decreased. People used to come with all sorts of problems. They don’t get to you now, they either see the officers or the Listeners. (Governor-grade, 27 years experience)

One or two individuals, if they haven’t had more or less what they demanded, they get aggressive. When i t is talked through again and it is pointed out why they haven’t had a phone call or whatever, it is mainly back to square one. I t isn’t strictly speaking a Listener problem, but it is in everyone’s interest to iron things out. (Listener 1)

Such comments suggest that Listeners can, and often do, step out of their Listening role to befriend prisoners with a range of problems. Of course, prisoners have often enjoyed mutual support from one another, but the emphasis is increasingly on a more formal approach to helping others:

If a prisoner comes to me and says, I want to write a letter but I am not very good with words, currently the official line is that we have got an officer who will, if he can find the time, compose a letter. He reads it to the prisoner and then sends it out. That is the sort of thing where prisoners could be helping. They could teach other prisoners to read, or they could run reception or even discharge groups. There is no end to it. (Principal Officer, 16 years experience)

Conclusion: From Small Acorns? The Swansea Listener Scheme arose out of the tragedy of Phillip Knight’s suicide, and stemmed from a determination from all concerned that both the prison and its own community could do more to ensure a reduction in suicide and self-injury. The scheme employs a traditionally under-used and effectively nil cost resource, and as a ‘bottom up’ initiative from staff and prisoners, the accompanying pride and determination amongst the participants should ensure its continued success.

The effect of the scheme both in terms of working practices and relationships has been nothing short of spectacular. Initially perceived by many as a threat to authority and by some as ‘social work on the cheap’, the scheme quickly became established as a welcome part of the system. Similar schemes now exist in 40 other prisons, thanks partly to a concerted effort by Home Office officials, and staff and Listeners at Swansea. The traditional veil of secrecy over prison suicides, where the gates were an effective barrier to ‘outside’ interference, is beginning to disappear and be replaced by a greater openness, sharing and an admission that none of us knows as much as all of us. Some prisons have shown a reluctance to take on the concept of shared responsibility for suicide and self-injury; indeed, some have yet to develop effective liaison with the samaritan^.^ The question we should ask is whether a prison can afford not to utilise all the resources at its disposal. It is certainly a question that could be asked of a prison governor at any future coroner’s court.

This paper suggests there have been a number of unforeseen but very welcome consequences of the Swansea Listener Scheme. At long last we are beginning to view the life of a prisoner as one which incorporates both

134 @ Basil Blackwell Ltd. 1994

rights and responsibilities. Prisoners are entitled to a good level of care and support, but they can also be encouraged to share certain moral responsibilities with staff. What better than to involve them in life or death issues?

Notes ’ For a more detailed account of the Swansea Listener Scheme see Davies (1992).

On a recent visit to HMP Swansea the author was pleased to discover that the strip cell - now called the care room - had been ‘adopted’ by prisoners on the young offender unit. ‘Safe’ furniture made of paper was being installed in the care room, complete with attractive colours and styles Jo Pilling, previous Director General of the Prison Service, opened the door for innovative reforms a speech to the ISTD Conference in June 1992. He stressed the need for:

A culture which encourages initiative, which allows people to take risks and make mistakes, and which is supported at every level.

The notion that care and control are not mutually exclusive first gained prominence in Ian Dunbar’s (1985) publication of ‘A sense of direction’. One much travelled prisoner and Listener had strong views on why progress is so slow in particular prisons:

We have got management and the POA. When these two stop being at loggerheads, and the cons stop being a buffer, then perhaps we won’t have any more Strangeways. Give cons a chance.

References Boyle, J. (1977) A Sense of Freedom, London: Pan. Davies, B. (1991) ‘Internal report on suicide prevention at HMP Swansea’,

Davies, B. (1992) Supplement to Annual Report on the Work of the Prison Service 1991-2,

Dunbar, I. (1985) ‘A sense of direction’, Home Ofice Prison Department

Liebling, A. (1992) Suicide in Prison, London: Routledge.

(unpublished).

London: HMSO.

pamphlet (unpublished).

Appendix: Interview Schedule Swansea Listener Scheme

A . Listeners

1. How long are you serving? (remand or sentence) 2. Is this your first experience of custody -

a. at Swansea? b. elsewhere?

3. What did you think when you first heard of the Listener Scheme? 4. What encouraged you to join? 5. Was the training adequate? 6. Are the support sessions useful? 7. How long have you been a Listener?

135

@ Basil Blackwell Ltd. 1994