Mental health service user involvement in policy development

social inclusion or disempowerment?

Sue Cowan, David Banks, Paul Crawshaw, Andrew Clifton

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    Purpose – The paper’s purpose is to reopen a debate around the potential impact of narrow
    conceptualisations of inclusion, or participation, of service users in current mental health policy
    development and implementation.
    Design/methodology/approach – The approach here is a conceptual analysis of the continuity of
    "New Labour" thinking and its connection to Putnam on social capital and citizenship, whilst also
    offering counter critiques drawing on Bourdieu, Rose, and Arnstein.
    Findings – The findings show the potential for disempowerment and argue for alternative service user
    action, either contracting on ‘‘their own rules of engagement’’ or specifically taking up an oppositional
    stance to disempowering forms of involvement. The authors also draw attention to the influence of differing
    English and Scottish policy drivers which appear to offer potentially different forms of engagement.
    Originality/value – The paper offers a fresh analysis that particularly points to the potential value
    of service user groups considering alternative forms of involvement, rather than those prescribed by
    ‘‘Third Way’’ or ‘‘Big Society’’ thinking.
    Keywords Service user involvement, Social inclusion, Participation, Co-option, Citizenship
    Paper type Conceptual paper
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)177-184
    Number of pages8
    JournalMental Health Review Journal
    Volume16
    Issue number4
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2011

    Fingerprint

    development policy
    health service
    mental health
    inclusion
    participation
    New Labour
    social capital
    continuity
    citizenship
    driver
    methodology
    Values
    Group

    Cite this

    Cowan, Sue ; Banks, David ; Crawshaw, Paul ; Clifton, Andrew. / Mental health service user involvement in policy development : social inclusion or disempowerment?. In: Mental Health Review Journal. 2011 ; Vol. 16, No. 4. pp. 177-184.
    @article{52b9488327f54c379f41ce7793b9f8cf,
    title = "Mental health service user involvement in policy development: social inclusion or disempowerment?",
    abstract = "Purpose – The paper’s purpose is to reopen a debate around the potential impact of narrowconceptualisations of inclusion, or participation, of service users in current mental health policydevelopment and implementation.Design/methodology/approach – The approach here is a conceptual analysis of the continuity of{"}New Labour{"} thinking and its connection to Putnam on social capital and citizenship, whilst alsooffering counter critiques drawing on Bourdieu, Rose, and Arnstein.Findings – The findings show the potential for disempowerment and argue for alternative service useraction, either contracting on ‘‘their own rules of engagement’’ or specifically taking up an oppositionalstance to disempowering forms of involvement. The authors also draw attention to the influence of differingEnglish and Scottish policy drivers which appear to offer potentially different forms of engagement.Originality/value – The paper offers a fresh analysis that particularly points to the potential valueof service user groups considering alternative forms of involvement, rather than those prescribed by‘‘Third Way’’ or ‘‘Big Society’’ thinking.Keywords Service user involvement, Social inclusion, Participation, Co-option, CitizenshipPaper type Conceptual paper",
    author = "Sue Cowan and David Banks and Paul Crawshaw and Andrew Clifton",
    year = "2011",
    doi = "10.1108/13619321111202331",
    language = "English",
    volume = "16",
    pages = "177--184",
    journal = "Mental Health Review Journal",
    issn = "1361-9322",
    publisher = "Emerald Publishing Limited",
    number = "4",

    }

    Mental health service user involvement in policy development : social inclusion or disempowerment? / Cowan, Sue; Banks, David; Crawshaw, Paul; Clifton, Andrew.

    In: Mental Health Review Journal, Vol. 16, No. 4, 2011, p. 177-184.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Mental health service user involvement in policy development

    T2 - social inclusion or disempowerment?

    AU - Cowan, Sue

    AU - Banks, David

    AU - Crawshaw, Paul

    AU - Clifton, Andrew

    PY - 2011

    Y1 - 2011

    N2 - Purpose – The paper’s purpose is to reopen a debate around the potential impact of narrowconceptualisations of inclusion, or participation, of service users in current mental health policydevelopment and implementation.Design/methodology/approach – The approach here is a conceptual analysis of the continuity of"New Labour" thinking and its connection to Putnam on social capital and citizenship, whilst alsooffering counter critiques drawing on Bourdieu, Rose, and Arnstein.Findings – The findings show the potential for disempowerment and argue for alternative service useraction, either contracting on ‘‘their own rules of engagement’’ or specifically taking up an oppositionalstance to disempowering forms of involvement. The authors also draw attention to the influence of differingEnglish and Scottish policy drivers which appear to offer potentially different forms of engagement.Originality/value – The paper offers a fresh analysis that particularly points to the potential valueof service user groups considering alternative forms of involvement, rather than those prescribed by‘‘Third Way’’ or ‘‘Big Society’’ thinking.Keywords Service user involvement, Social inclusion, Participation, Co-option, CitizenshipPaper type Conceptual paper

    AB - Purpose – The paper’s purpose is to reopen a debate around the potential impact of narrowconceptualisations of inclusion, or participation, of service users in current mental health policydevelopment and implementation.Design/methodology/approach – The approach here is a conceptual analysis of the continuity of"New Labour" thinking and its connection to Putnam on social capital and citizenship, whilst alsooffering counter critiques drawing on Bourdieu, Rose, and Arnstein.Findings – The findings show the potential for disempowerment and argue for alternative service useraction, either contracting on ‘‘their own rules of engagement’’ or specifically taking up an oppositionalstance to disempowering forms of involvement. The authors also draw attention to the influence of differingEnglish and Scottish policy drivers which appear to offer potentially different forms of engagement.Originality/value – The paper offers a fresh analysis that particularly points to the potential valueof service user groups considering alternative forms of involvement, rather than those prescribed by‘‘Third Way’’ or ‘‘Big Society’’ thinking.Keywords Service user involvement, Social inclusion, Participation, Co-option, CitizenshipPaper type Conceptual paper

    U2 - 10.1108/13619321111202331

    DO - 10.1108/13619321111202331

    M3 - Article

    VL - 16

    SP - 177

    EP - 184

    JO - Mental Health Review Journal

    JF - Mental Health Review Journal

    SN - 1361-9322

    IS - 4

    ER -