Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Those most effected by health inequalities, RADICAL CARE (2018) - Hillary…
-
RADICAL CARE (2018) - Hillary Cottom 5 experiments starting in 2004 to explore how we might redesign the welfare state (like Beveridge went from cradle to the grave)
-
The Beveridge Committee's report was presented to parliament in November 1942, and proposed a new type of welfare state to banish "want", provide social insurance "from cradle to grave", and ensure that the type of social deprivation seen during the pre-Second World War economic depression could not happen again
how to live with chronic conditions (this wasn't previously on the agenda, post WW11)
CARE - never known what to do about this and was basically just assigned to women in the home and LAs
-
Health LEADERS dislocated from everyday life. While health leaders understand her work the top poitical leaders don't
WIGAN DEAL - transforming the system (Brave and lucky) happened over a decase but on the whole we are trapped in short term £50k projects.
-
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
Concept of DEMOCRATIC ENGAGEMENT IN POLICY has as much salience as the idea that policy should be based on evidence (Hill O'Connor 23)
ideas which point to the same broad aims of improving policymaking BUT HAVE DEVELOPED LARGELY IN ISOLATION FROM EACH OTHER
ONE TECHNOCRACTIC AS AN IDEAL, THE OTHER DEMOCRATIC - WHILE SHARING THE SAME AIM, MAY IN REALITY BE IN CONFLICT WITH EACH OTHER!
without consulting public power only lies with academics and local decision-makers? For accountability? How representative really are these fora?
-
'Greedy bastard hypothesis' - focus on the elites making the decisions that are most responsible for inequalities Scambler
NIHR expectation that there will be PPI (and this will involve under-represented residents?) Check APPLICATION FORM
-
POLICY DECISIONS SHOULD BE SUPPORTED BY DEMOCRATIC ENGAGEMENT BEYOND THE STRUCTURES OF REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY (see Hill O'Connor 23)
this is VERY evident through the HDRC documentation/ NIHR application process (the quetsions are very leading)
mirrors the EBP rhethoric of New Labour, in that it is depoliticised and in some ways presented as axiomatic and unchallengable as a concept. As in: the more robust the evidence is, the more likely it will be used to inform decisions, and the more robust the decisions will be. The more the public are involved in research, and the more vulnerable those residents/ members of the public are, the more decisions will be truly democratic and representative of those who will benefit the most from challenging health inequalities.
LACK OF CIVIC ENGAGEMENT - lack of lay understanding of where the locus of power is or the best places to intervene in the system (e.g perhaps useful to compile resource list of This is where you can join XR for lobbying at international/ national scale, down to here is a local group who work on tech repairs as part of efforts reduce tech waste across the borough.
lack of transparency and/ or knowledge about what happens post consultation - feeding into the feeling even amongst LA staff that people are being asked invasive and personal questions and then being hung out to dry
Arline Geronimus - one of her pricinciples aligns with 'nothing about us without us' in weathering, need to look this up.
-
Literature on EBP and public engagement has been developed in isolation, separately from each other. LIT IS NOT INTEGRATED BUT EXPECTATION TO BE ABLE TO IS RIFE
-
-
NOT STARTING FROM THE INSTITUTIONAL BUT SHE INSTEAD STARTS FROM ASKING PEOPLE WHAT MAKES THEM FLOURISH AND WHAT IS IMPORTANT TO THEM?
-
-
What is possible in terms of points to intervene in the system. Where is the locus of control? Can't overthrow the government
-
While this may have originally stemmed from the perceived authority that acdemia would have, it seems safe to say that the public's experience of e.g childcare review, or partygate reviews have debased 'research' somewhat too
-
risk of asking the same qs that have been already been asked or not having the skills to ask useful research qs. Risk of putting people being involved in the first place by saying you'll gain research skills
-
-