PubMedDate not supplied
Overall, the experience was a positive one for both the facilitators and, according to their evaluation forms, the group members. The group were visibly upset at the end of the final session and there were many vigorous handshakes upon departure. On reflection, there were several specific aspects that could be adjusted to improve the format of future groups. First, there were some queries over the necessity of the last two sessions as it was felt the group peaked at session eight in terms of self-disclosure of new information, reflecting on this and moving forward. In the last two weeks the material introduced tended to be replications of input from previous meetings and there was a sense of the sessions being drawn out to fill the time. In hindsight, this may have been due to the winding-down process that is a common in group work. The timing within each session could also be managed more closely to ensure that sufficient space was allowed at the end for reflection on the themes addressed. This proved more difficult than it appeared while running the group as the men tended to use the summary time to introduce further self-disclosures that could not go unacknowledged and so in turn reinitiated discussions. Despite having spent time with each potential group member when inviting them to participate, explaining what we hoped to achieve, a further improvement would be to make the anticipated direction more explicit. It was felt that attendees came to the first session without having formed a clear understanding of what was expected of them. This caused unnecessarily high levels of anxiety for facilitators and group members alike. Overall, however, these points represent quite small adjustments and it is hoped that this article will raise awareness of the issues with readers wishing to facilitate such groups so that they can benefit from our experiences and enhance their group work as a consequence.