stephenrollnick

A posting arrived in this forum from Sam Young, which he inserted as a reply to the advertisement about MINT training for new trainers (another topic). he then wrote to me and suggested that he might have put it in the wrong place, and I really agree with him.

It deserves a title all of its own.  So I gave it one here, and here below is Sam's posting. I shall give it some thought and reply soon. Feel free to weigh in yourself, anyone with an interest in this topic. Here is what Sam says:

Hi, Steve:

Whenever I see a training announcement like this (MINT Training for New Trainers), I reflect on why I’m not in the MINT after getting first rate training in it from several MINT trainers in the past. Right off the top, the most likely reasons are that I am not much of a joiner in the first place, but in the second, I could never understand why a 2-3 day face- to- face training qualified one for the MINT but an extended supervised training via a distance environment did not. After all, for slow learners  like me, the latter seemed ideal, not to mention the plus of having ongoing supervision, even from a distance, over a longer haul than 2-3 days. So I pretty much practiced on my own, with profound results that I fully attribute more to the power of the therapy than my particular skill. It really is the most difficult—and rewarding—approach I have ever used.

Having said that, I’m deeply concerned about how MI is being manipulated in some quarters. I have experienced MINT trainers who identify themselves as “MINT certified” even when faced with website data that confirms that MINT as an organization does not certify trainers. I have experienced MINT trainers and/or their marketers try to snatch MI trainees from other non-MINT MI training venues because the former’s trainer was supposedly “certified” by MINT.

Licensed doctoral level professionals mandating that their staff assimilate MI skills without question (lowers the risk of litigation, don’t ya know…). Bureaucrats who don’t know MI from the man on the moon mandating MI interventions to avoid paybacks. I fear that institutionalized MI is poisoning the (for me) quite sacred MI well…

Where am I going wrong, Steve? And what needs to be done?

Dear Sam,

I’d be very interested to understand what your experiences of MINT have been. Have you applied for the Training for New Trainers course which entitles one to join MINT? Did you fail to get in? is that why you say,

I could never understand why a 2-3 day face- to- face training qualified one for the MINT but an extended supervised training via a distance environment did not. After all, for slow learners  like me, the latter seemed ideal, not to mention the plus of having ongoing supervision, even from a distance, over a longer haul than 2-3 days.

Perhaps you can explain the context of this concern of your?

Needless to say, please don’t see me as having any kind of official voice in MINT, let alone over their selection of candidates. I used to do this in the “old days”, but it is now much bigger, with others involved (more on that later).

I will come back to your other points soon. My gut reaction, for what its worth, is that if you were rejected, that’s dam unlucky if it was on the basis of not being adequately qualified. But I am not sure what happened.

Kind regards,

Steve

Hi, Steve:

No, I never applied to MINT.  The MINT trainers I had were excellent.  But as a public sector therapist with the typical crushing workload and small paycheck, I never thought MINT membership would provide me much that I couldn't get from the website.  Plus, (BIG plus), the highly volatile populations I have worked with through the years seemed to call for an MI not clearly represented in the standard literature.  As a result, I've had to find my way largely on my own, with little more than the beacon of the "spirit of MI" to guide me.  Since then we have begun to see an impressive offering of MI in correctional settings, very much including the free e-book offered on the MI training webpage.  But as have continued to evolve, I find myself very close to normative MI even within a correctional context.  We need more research with MI in correctional populations.

So... I may well shake the dust off my list of trainers, contact them for a reference, and apply.   Maybe my experiences in MI modification could serve others, as you, by generously giving me your ear recently and all of us with your oeuvre in general, have blessed the world.  Thank you, Steve.

Hi Sam

I am a little confused by your post.
Are you saying that you would like to become a trainer in Motivational Interviewing? The MINT is an international group of MI trainers and the focus of the group is on supporting each other in the provision of good quality MI training.I belong to this group and the generosity of the members in sharing ideas, expertise and training exercises and much more has made a huge difference to my confidence and the quality of my training workshops and is well worth the modest membership fee.

All members of the MINT have attended a three day trainer for trainers (TNT) event and then pay an annual subscription to become a member of MINT. These events are listed on the website and the event for 2011 is in Sheffield UK, 2010 is in San Deigo USA. The application process is open to all who have an interest in becoming MI trainers.