title: Flexible ACT & Resource-group ACT: Different Working Procedures Which Can Supplement and Strengthen Each Other. A Response.
abstract: This article is a response to Nordén and Norlander's 'Absence of Positive Results for Flexible Assertive Community Treatment. What is the next approach?'[1], in which they assert that 'at present [there is] no evidence for Flexible ACT and… that RACT might be able to provide new impulses and new vitality to the treatment mode of ACT'. We question their analyses and conclusions. We clarify Flexible ACT, referring to the Flexible Assertive Community Treatment Manual (van Veldhuizen, 2013) [2] to rectify misconceptions. We discuss Nordén and Norlander's interpretation of research on Flexible ACT. The fact that too little research has been done and that there are insufficient positive results cannot serve as a reason to propagate RACT. However, the Resource Group method does provide inspiration for working with clients to involve their networks more effectively in Flexible ACT.
authors.affiliation: CCAF (Certification Centre for ACT and FACT), Utrecht, The Netherlands.
authors.forename: Remmers
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: van Veldhuizen
authors.affiliation: Innovations in Mental Health Care, Maastricht University and Mondriaan (Mental Health Service), The Netherlands.
authors.forename: Philippe
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Delespaul
authors.affiliation: Reintegration and Community Care, Trimbos Institute, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
authors.forename: Hans
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Kroon
authors.affiliation: Public Mental Health, Epidemiological and Social Psychiatric Research institute, Erasmus MC; Parnassia Psychiatric Institute, The Netherlands.
authors.forename: Niels
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Mulder
keywords: ACT; FACT; RACT; community care; flexible ACT; resource ACT