The snakes and ladders of user involvement:moving beyond Arnstein

For 35 years, Arnstein's ladder of citizen participation has been a touchstone for policy makers and practitioners promoting user involvement. This article critically assesses Arnstein's writing in relation to user involvement in health drawing on evidence from the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Finland, Sweden and Canada. Arnstein's model, however, by solely emphasizing power, limits effective responses to the challenge of involving users in services and undermines the potential of the user involvement process. Such an emphasis on power assumes that it has a common basis for users, providers and policymakers and ignores the existence of different relevant forms of knowledge and expertise. It also fails to recognise that for some users, participation itself may be a goal. We propose a new model to replace the static image of a ladder and argue that for user involvement to improve health services it must acknowledge the value of the process and the diversity of knowledge and experience of both health professionals and lay people.

Divided care and the Third Way:user involvement in statutory and voluntary sector cancer services

In health care, as in much of the public sphere, the voluntary sector is playing an increasingly large role in the funding, provision and delivery of services and nowhere is this more apparent than in cancer care. Simultaneously the growth of privatisation, marketisation and consumerism has engendered a rise in the promotion of 'user involvement' in health care. These changes in the organisation and delivery of health care, in part inspired by the 'Third Way' and the promotion of public and citizen participation, are particularly apparent in the British National Health Service. This paper presents initial findings from a three-year study of user involvement in cancer services. Using both case study and survey data, we explore the variation in the definition, aims, usefulness and mechanisms for involving users in the evaluation and development of cancer services across three Health Authorities in South West England. The findings have important implications for understanding shifts in power, autonomy and responsibility between patients, carers, clinicians and health service managers. The absence of any common definition of user involvement or its purpose underlines the limited trust between the different actors in the system and highlights the potentially negative impact of a Third Way health service.