Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Critical Social Policy
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cowden, S.
Right arrow Articles by Singh, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

The ‘User’: Friend, foe or fetish?: A critical exploration of user involvement in health and social care

Stephen Cowden

Gurnam Singh

Coventry University

‘User Involvement’ has become the new mantra in Public Services with professionals constantly being reminded that ‘user knows best’. The pur pose of this paper is to ask where the preoccupation with ‘the User’ comes from and to pose some questions about what ‘User Involvement’ actually means. Within our paper we see three issues as central within this. The first is a consideration of the historical antecedents of the discourse of ‘User Involvement’, focusing in on the struggles over British welfare that took place around the late 1970s–early 1980s. This forms the context from which we seek to understand and critique the New Labour project in relation to the massive expansion of regulatory frame works. We argue that, far from enabling the delivery of high quality integrated services that truly reflect the interests of current and future users, these policies represent the further commodification of basic human needs and welfare. Finally, it has become apparent the current ‘User’ discourse has assumed contradictory manifestations, in particular the emergence of groupings of ‘professional users’ who participate in the formation of state policy as ‘expert consultants’. We conclude by arguing for an approach in which user perspectives are neither privileged nor subjugated, but are situated in a process of creative critical dialogue with professionals, which is linked to the development of a concept of welfare driven by emancipatory rather than regulatory imperatives.

Key Words: empowerment • ideology • user • user involvement

Critical Social Policy, Vol. 27, No. 1, 5-23 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/0261018307072205


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Br J Soc WorkHome page
H. McLaughlin
What's in a Name: 'Client', 'Patient', 'Customer', 'Consumer', 'Expert by Experience', 'Service User'--What's Next?
Br. J. Soc. Work, February 21, 2008; (2008) bcm155v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]