User involvement and the NHS reforms

The policy of `user involvement' in the UK National Health Service emerged during the 1990s along with the reforms that created an internal market. Despite the official rhetoric, progress has been limited. Critics suggest that, not only was the policy flawed in its conception by the constructio...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy 1998-11, Vol.1 (2), p.73-81
Hauptverfasser: Rhodes, Penny, Nocon, Andrew
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext bestellen
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 81
container_issue 2
container_start_page 73
container_title Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy
container_volume 1
creator Rhodes, Penny
Nocon, Andrew
description The policy of `user involvement' in the UK National Health Service emerged during the 1990s along with the reforms that created an internal market. Despite the official rhetoric, progress has been limited. Critics suggest that, not only was the policy flawed in its conception by the construction of service users as consumers and the conflation of consumerism with empowerment, but collaborative models of involvement have tended to legitimate rather than challenge existing provision. Some commentators have questioned the value of user involvement initiatives and proposed that alternative approaches, such as a strengthening of procedural rights or alignment with broader political campaigns, would be more appropriate. The low prominence given in the recent Government White Paper The New NHS1 to the contribution of service users, however, represents less of an ideological shift than a concentration on other, in the Government's view, more pressing priorities: namely, a concern to address the problems of public legitimacy and low staff morale by engaging in greater public participation and giving health professionals a more central role. The result has been a weakening of the users' voice by a conflation of user involvement with public participation and giving health professionals the authority to define users' needs for them. Service users risk, not only having their contribution devalued, but losing the right to an independent and distinctive voice. There is a real danger that the issues of user involvement will not be included on local agendas and the disparities between provision and need and between professionals' and users' views will increase.
doi_str_mv 10.1046/j.1369-6513.1998.00021.x
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_24P</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5139900</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>57726218</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4151-57540e0a7b95d6365757e5683eb6bf50a39abd16c63211ac72906c06a756c0123</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkW1rFDEQxxdRbG39CrKgiG92nUk2kyxIQUvtCaWFaqv4Zsju5eye-1CTu_P67c32jvrwQvpqJszvP5mZf5KkCDlCQa_nOUoqM1IocyxLkwOAwHz9INm9LWgS6uE2H6Gd5EkIcwDU0ujHyQ6iMGhI7CYvLoLzadOvhnblOtcvUttP08WVS08nH1PvZoPvwn7yaGbb4J5u415y8f7o0-EkOzk7_nD49iSrC1SYKa0KcGB1VaopSYpv7RQZ6SqqZgqsLG01RapJCkRba1EC1UBWqxhQyL3kYNP3ell1blrHcbxt-do3nfU3PNiG_670zRV_G1YcVyxLgNjg5baBH34sXVhw14Tata3t3bAMrLQWJNBE8NV_QTRKkAIBGNHn_6DzYen7eAeWQJri5sX4s9lQtR9CiHe7mxqBR894zqMdPNrBo2d86xmvo_TZn1v_Fm5NisCbDfCzad3NvRvz5OhLTKI828ibsHDrO7n135m01Io_nx7zxFy-M1_PC76UvwAnj7Et</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3067615140</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>User involvement and the NHS reforms</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Titles</source><creator>Rhodes, Penny ; Nocon, Andrew</creator><creatorcontrib>Rhodes, Penny ; Nocon, Andrew</creatorcontrib><description>The policy of `user involvement' in the UK National Health Service emerged during the 1990s along with the reforms that created an internal market. Despite the official rhetoric, progress has been limited. Critics suggest that, not only was the policy flawed in its conception by the construction of service users as consumers and the conflation of consumerism with empowerment, but collaborative models of involvement have tended to legitimate rather than challenge existing provision. Some commentators have questioned the value of user involvement initiatives and proposed that alternative approaches, such as a strengthening of procedural rights or alignment with broader political campaigns, would be more appropriate. The low prominence given in the recent Government White Paper The New NHS1 to the contribution of service users, however, represents less of an ideological shift than a concentration on other, in the Government's view, more pressing priorities: namely, a concern to address the problems of public legitimacy and low staff morale by engaging in greater public participation and giving health professionals a more central role. The result has been a weakening of the users' voice by a conflation of user involvement with public participation and giving health professionals the authority to define users' needs for them. Service users risk, not only having their contribution devalued, but losing the right to an independent and distinctive voice. There is a real danger that the issues of user involvement will not be included on local agendas and the disparities between provision and need and between professionals' and users' views will increase.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1369-6513</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1369-7625</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1046/j.1369-6513.1998.00021.x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 11281862</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford UK: Blackwell Science Ltd</publisher><subject>Alternative approaches ; Citizen participation ; Consumerism ; Empowerment ; Government ; health professionals ; Health services ; Internal market ; Legitimacy ; Medical personnel ; Morale ; National health services ; Political campaigns ; Professional attitudes ; Public participation ; Reforms ; Rhetoric ; Role ; User involvement ; View Point ; white paper</subject><ispartof>Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 1998-11, Vol.1 (2), p.73-81</ispartof><rights>1998. This work is published under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4151-57540e0a7b95d6365757e5683eb6bf50a39abd16c63211ac72906c06a756c0123</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5139900/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5139900/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,1417,11562,27924,27925,30999,31000,45574,45575,46052,46476,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1046%2Fj.1369-6513.1998.00021.x$$EView_record_in_Wiley-Blackwell$$FView_record_in_$$GWiley-Blackwell</linktorsrc><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11281862$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Rhodes, Penny</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nocon, Andrew</creatorcontrib><title>User involvement and the NHS reforms</title><title>Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy</title><addtitle>Health Expect</addtitle><description>The policy of `user involvement' in the UK National Health Service emerged during the 1990s along with the reforms that created an internal market. Despite the official rhetoric, progress has been limited. Critics suggest that, not only was the policy flawed in its conception by the construction of service users as consumers and the conflation of consumerism with empowerment, but collaborative models of involvement have tended to legitimate rather than challenge existing provision. Some commentators have questioned the value of user involvement initiatives and proposed that alternative approaches, such as a strengthening of procedural rights or alignment with broader political campaigns, would be more appropriate. The low prominence given in the recent Government White Paper The New NHS1 to the contribution of service users, however, represents less of an ideological shift than a concentration on other, in the Government's view, more pressing priorities: namely, a concern to address the problems of public legitimacy and low staff morale by engaging in greater public participation and giving health professionals a more central role. The result has been a weakening of the users' voice by a conflation of user involvement with public participation and giving health professionals the authority to define users' needs for them. Service users risk, not only having their contribution devalued, but losing the right to an independent and distinctive voice. There is a real danger that the issues of user involvement will not be included on local agendas and the disparities between provision and need and between professionals' and users' views will increase.</description><subject>Alternative approaches</subject><subject>Citizen participation</subject><subject>Consumerism</subject><subject>Empowerment</subject><subject>Government</subject><subject>health professionals</subject><subject>Health services</subject><subject>Internal market</subject><subject>Legitimacy</subject><subject>Medical personnel</subject><subject>Morale</subject><subject>National health services</subject><subject>Political campaigns</subject><subject>Professional attitudes</subject><subject>Public participation</subject><subject>Reforms</subject><subject>Rhetoric</subject><subject>Role</subject><subject>User involvement</subject><subject>View Point</subject><subject>white paper</subject><issn>1369-6513</issn><issn>1369-7625</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1998</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkW1rFDEQxxdRbG39CrKgiG92nUk2kyxIQUvtCaWFaqv4Zsju5eye-1CTu_P67c32jvrwQvpqJszvP5mZf5KkCDlCQa_nOUoqM1IocyxLkwOAwHz9INm9LWgS6uE2H6Gd5EkIcwDU0ujHyQ6iMGhI7CYvLoLzadOvhnblOtcvUttP08WVS08nH1PvZoPvwn7yaGbb4J5u415y8f7o0-EkOzk7_nD49iSrC1SYKa0KcGB1VaopSYpv7RQZ6SqqZgqsLG01RapJCkRba1EC1UBWqxhQyL3kYNP3ell1blrHcbxt-do3nfU3PNiG_670zRV_G1YcVyxLgNjg5baBH34sXVhw14Tata3t3bAMrLQWJNBE8NV_QTRKkAIBGNHn_6DzYen7eAeWQJri5sX4s9lQtR9CiHe7mxqBR894zqMdPNrBo2d86xmvo_TZn1v_Fm5NisCbDfCzad3NvRvz5OhLTKI828ibsHDrO7n135m01Io_nx7zxFy-M1_PC76UvwAnj7Et</recordid><startdate>199811</startdate><enddate>199811</enddate><creator>Rhodes, Penny</creator><creator>Nocon, Andrew</creator><general>Blackwell Science Ltd</general><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>7T2</scope><scope>ASE</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FPQ</scope><scope>K6X</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>199811</creationdate><title>User involvement and the NHS reforms</title><author>Rhodes, Penny ; Nocon, Andrew</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4151-57540e0a7b95d6365757e5683eb6bf50a39abd16c63211ac72906c06a756c0123</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1998</creationdate><topic>Alternative approaches</topic><topic>Citizen participation</topic><topic>Consumerism</topic><topic>Empowerment</topic><topic>Government</topic><topic>health professionals</topic><topic>Health services</topic><topic>Internal market</topic><topic>Legitimacy</topic><topic>Medical personnel</topic><topic>Morale</topic><topic>National health services</topic><topic>Political campaigns</topic><topic>Professional attitudes</topic><topic>Public participation</topic><topic>Reforms</topic><topic>Rhetoric</topic><topic>Role</topic><topic>User involvement</topic><topic>View Point</topic><topic>white paper</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Rhodes, Penny</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nocon, Andrew</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>Health and Safety Science Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>British Nursing Index (BNI) (1985 to Present)</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Rhodes, Penny</au><au>Nocon, Andrew</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>User involvement and the NHS reforms</atitle><jtitle>Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy</jtitle><addtitle>Health Expect</addtitle><date>1998-11</date><risdate>1998</risdate><volume>1</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>73</spage><epage>81</epage><pages>73-81</pages><issn>1369-6513</issn><eissn>1369-7625</eissn><abstract>The policy of `user involvement' in the UK National Health Service emerged during the 1990s along with the reforms that created an internal market. Despite the official rhetoric, progress has been limited. Critics suggest that, not only was the policy flawed in its conception by the construction of service users as consumers and the conflation of consumerism with empowerment, but collaborative models of involvement have tended to legitimate rather than challenge existing provision. Some commentators have questioned the value of user involvement initiatives and proposed that alternative approaches, such as a strengthening of procedural rights or alignment with broader political campaigns, would be more appropriate. The low prominence given in the recent Government White Paper The New NHS1 to the contribution of service users, however, represents less of an ideological shift than a concentration on other, in the Government's view, more pressing priorities: namely, a concern to address the problems of public legitimacy and low staff morale by engaging in greater public participation and giving health professionals a more central role. The result has been a weakening of the users' voice by a conflation of user involvement with public participation and giving health professionals the authority to define users' needs for them. Service users risk, not only having their contribution devalued, but losing the right to an independent and distinctive voice. There is a real danger that the issues of user involvement will not be included on local agendas and the disparities between provision and need and between professionals' and users' views will increase.</abstract><cop>Oxford UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Science Ltd</pub><pmid>11281862</pmid><doi>10.1046/j.1369-6513.1998.00021.x</doi><tpages>9</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext_linktorsrc
identifier ISSN: 1369-6513
ispartof Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 1998-11, Vol.1 (2), p.73-81
issn 1369-6513
1369-7625
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5139900
source Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Titles
subjects Alternative approaches
Citizen participation
Consumerism
Empowerment
Government
health professionals
Health services
Internal market
Legitimacy
Medical personnel
Morale
National health services
Political campaigns
Professional attitudes
Public participation
Reforms
Rhetoric
Role
User involvement
View Point
white paper
title User involvement and the NHS reforms
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T08%3A51%3A30IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_24P&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=User%20involvement%20and%20the%20NHS%20reforms&rft.jtitle=Health%20expectations%20:%20an%20international%20journal%20of%20public%20participation%20in%20health%20care%20and%20health%20policy&rft.au=Rhodes,%20Penny&rft.date=1998-11&rft.volume=1&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=73&rft.epage=81&rft.pages=73-81&rft.issn=1369-6513&rft.eissn=1369-7625&rft_id=info:doi/10.1046/j.1369-6513.1998.00021.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_24P%3E57726218%3C/proquest_24P%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3067615140&rft_id=info:pmid/11281862&rfr_iscdi=true