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...
Gespeichert in:
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: | , |
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 & 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 & 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 & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & 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 |