Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-768ffcd9cc-nzrtw Total loading time: 0.286 Render date: 2022-12-03T21:51:09.082Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "useRatesEcommerce": false } hasContentIssue true

‘The Taste Buddies’: participation and empowerment in a residential home for older people

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 August 2011

VIVIANNE BAUR*
Affiliation:
VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
TINEKE ABMA
Affiliation:
VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
*
Address for correspondence: Vivianne Baur, Department of Medical Humanities, VU Medical Centre, Van der Boechorststraat 7, Amsterdam 1081 BT, The Netherlands. E-mail: v.baur@vumc.nl

Abstract

The active participation and autonomy of older people living in residential homes is considered to be problematic. However, in our action research project conducted in a Dutch residential care organisation we found ways to enhance residents' direct participation. This form of participation is grounded in deliberative and participatory approaches to democracy. In this article we describe how a group of seven residents (all female), calling themselves ‘The Taste Buddies’, developed a joint vision on how meals could be improved. The facilitation of this process enhanced this group's empowerment, building interpersonal trust, social identity and joint purpose. We will take the reader through this process and discuss the developments of these older women against the background of relational empowerment. We argue that resident participation as partnership with employees and managers starts with relational empowerment among residents themselves (enclave deliberation). This process is non-linear and requires time and constructive facilitation.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abbott, S., Fisk, M. and Forward, L. 2000. Social and democratic participation in residential settings for older people: realities and aspirations. Ageing & Society, 20, 327–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abma, T. A., Bruijn, A., Kardol, T., Schols, J. and Widdershoven, G. A. M. 2011. Responsibilities in elderly care. The narrative of duty and relations of Mr Powell. Bioethics. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8519.2011.01898.x.Google Scholar
Abma, T. A., Nierse, C. J. and Widdershoven, G. A. M. 2009. Patients as partners in responsive research: methodological notions for collaborations in mixed research teams. Qualitative Health Research, 19, 3, 401–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Agich, G. J. 1993. Autonomy and Long-term Care. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Baltes, M. and Wahl, H.-W. 1992. The behavior system of dependency in the elderly: interaction with the social environment. In Ory, M., Abeles, R. and Lipman, P. (eds), Aging, Health and Behavior. Sage Publications, Newbury Park, California, 83105.Google Scholar
Barber, B. R. 2004. Strong Democracy. Participatory Politics for a New Age. Berkeley, California: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Barclay, L. 2000. Autonomy and the social self. In Mackenzie, C. and Stoljar, N. (eds), Relational Autonomy. Feminist Perspectives on Autonomy, Agency, and the Social Self. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 5271.Google Scholar
Barnes, M. and Bennett, G. 1998. Frail bodies, courageous voices: older people influencing community care. Health and Social Care in the Community, 6, 2, 102–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baur, V. E. and Abma, T. A.Resident councils between life world and system: is there room for communicative action? Journal of Aging Studies, in press, doi:10.1016/j.jaging.2011.03.001.Google Scholar
Baur, V. E., Abma, T. A. and Widdershoven, G. A. M. 2010 a. Participation of marginalized groups in evaluation: mission impossible? Evaluation and Program Planning, 33, 3, 238–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baur, V. E., Van Elteren, A. H. G., Nierse, C. J. and Abma, T. A. 2010 b. Dealing with distrust and power dynamics: asymmetric relations among stakeholders in responsive evaluation. Evaluation, 16, 3, 233–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belderok, J. J. 2002. Zorg voor zelfstandigheid. Bewonersparticipatie in verzorgingshuis en verpleeghuis in het licht van drie moderniseringstheorieën [Care for Independence. Resident Participation in Residential Care Home and Nursing Home in the Light of Three Theories of Modernity]. SWP, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Den Braak, M. 2010. Oudere tehuisbewoners. Landelijk overzicht van de leefsituatie van ouderen in instellingen 2008/2009 [Older People Living in Care Homes. National Overview of the Living Situation of Older People Living in Institutions 2008/2009]. Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau, Den Haag.Google Scholar
Devitt, M. and Checkoway, B. 1982. Participation in nursing home resident councils: promise and practice. The Gerontologist, 22, 1, 4954.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dunston, R., Lee, A., Boud, D., Brodie, P. and Chiarella, M. 2009. Co-production and health system reform – from re-imagining to re-making. The Australian Journal of Public Administration, 68, 1, 3952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egan, M. and Lancaster, C. M. 2005. Comparing appreciative inquiry to action research: OD practitioner perspectives. Organization Development Journal, 23, 2, 2950.Google Scholar
Ferri, C. P., Prince, M., Brayne, C., Brodaty, H., Fratiglioni, L., Ganguli, M., Hall, K., Hasegawa, K., Hendrie, H., Huang, Y., Jorm, A., Mathers, C., Menezes, P. R., Rimmer, E. and Scazufca, M. 2005. Global prevalence of dementia: a Delphi consensus study. The Lancet, 366, 2112–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gergen, K. J. and Gergen, M. M. 2008. Social construction and research as action. In Reason, P. and Bradbury, H. (eds), The Sage Handbook of Action Research. Participative Inquiry and Practice. Sage Publications, Los Angeles, 159171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodin, R. E. and Dryzek, J. S. 2006. Deliberative impacts: the macro-political uptake of mini-publics. Politics & Society, 34, 2, 219–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holian, R. and Brooks, R. 2004. The Australian National Statement on ethical conduct in research: application and implementation for ‘insider’ applied research in business. Action Research International, paper 7. Available on-line: http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/ari/p-rholian04.htmlGoogle Scholar
Hubbard, G., Downs, M. G. and Tester, S. 2003. Including older people with dementia in research: challenges and strategies. Aging & Mental Health, 7, 5, 351–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
In ‘t Veld, R. 2010. Knowledge Democracy. Consequences for Science, Politics, and Media. Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Johnson, C. L. and Barer, B. M. 1992. Patterns of engagement and disengagement among the oldest old. Journal of Aging Studies, 6, 4, 351–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karpowitz, C. F., Raphael, C. and Hammond, A. S. 2009. Deliberative democracy and inequality: two cheers for enclave deliberation among the disempowered. Politics and Society, 37, 4, 576615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ludema, J. D. and Fry, R. E. 2008. The practice of appreciative inquiry. In Reason, P. and Bradbury, H. (eds), The Sage Handbook of Action Research. Participative Inquiry and Practice. Sage Publications, Los Angeles, 280–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacKenzie, C. and Stoljar, N. (eds) 2000. Relational Autonomy: Feminist Perspectives on Autonomy, Agency and the Social Self. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Mackewn, J. 2008. Facilitation as action research in the moment. In Reason, P. and Bradbury, H. (eds), The Sage Handbook of Action Research. Participative Inquiry and Practice. Sage Publications, Los Angeles, 615–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansbridge, J. J. 1996. Using power/fighting power: the polity. In Benhabib, S. (ed.), Democracy and Difference: Contesting Boundaries of the Political. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 4667.Google Scholar
Mathey, M. F., Vanneste, V. G., de Graaf, C., de Groot, L. C. and Van Staveren, W. A. 2001. Health effect of improved meal ambiance in a Dutch nursing home: a 1-year intervention study. Preventive Medicine, 32, 416–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mertens, D. 2009. Transformative Research and Evaluation. Guilford Press, New York.Google Scholar
Meyer, M. H. 1991. Assuring quality of care: nursing home resident councils. The Journal of Applied Gerontology, 10, 1, 103–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mitchell, P. and Koch, T. 1997. An attempt to give nursing home residents a voice in the quality improvement process: the challenge of frailty. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 6, 453–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moody, H. R. 2006. Aging: Concepts and Controversies. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, California.Google Scholar
Mullett, J. 2008. Presentational knowing: bridging experience and expression with art, poetry and song. In Reason, P. and Bradbury, H. (eds), The Sage Handbook of Action Research. Participative Inquiry and Practice. Sage Publications, Los Angeles, 450–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nierse, C. J. and Abma, T. A. 2011. Developing voice and empowerment: the first step towards a broad consultation in research agenda setting. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 55, 4, 411–421.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nijs, K. 2006. Optimizing the ambiance during mealtime in Dutch nursing homes. Thesis, Wageningen University, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Oliver, M. 1992. Changing the social relations of research production. Disability, Handicap & Society, 7, 2, 101–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rappaport, J. 1995. Empowerment meets narrative: listening to stories and creating settings. American Journal of Community Psychology, 23, 5, 795808.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reason, P. and Bradbury, H. (eds) 2008. The Sage Handbook of Action Research. Participative Inquiry and Practice. Sage Publications, Los Angeles.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reed, J. 2007. Appreciative Inquiry. Research for Change. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, California.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reed, J. and Payton, V. R. 1997. Understanding the dynamics of life in care homes for older people: implications for de-institutionalizing practice. Health and Social Care in the Community, 5, 4, 261–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryan, K. E. and Schwandt, T. A. 2002. Exploring Evaluator Role and Identity. Information Age Publishing, Greenwich, CT.Google Scholar
Ryfe, D. M. 2006. Narrative and deliberation in small group forums. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 34, 1, 7293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, B. 2004. Identity in Modern Society: A Social Psychological Perspective. Blackwell Publishing, Malden, Massachusetts.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Timoyijevic, L. and Raats, M. M. 2006. Evaluation of two methods of deliberative participation of older people in food-policy development. Health Policy, 82, 302–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Townsend, P. 1981. The structured dependency of the elderly: a creation of social policy in the twentieth century. Ageing & Society, 1, 528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanderPlaat, M. 1999. Locating the feminist scholar: relational empowerment and social activism. Qualitative Health Research, 9, 6, 773–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
White, H. C. 2008. Identity and Control. How Social Formations Emerge. Second edition, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.Google Scholar
Zeni, J. 1998. Guide to ethical issues and action research. Educational Action Research, 6, 1, 919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimmerman, M. A. 2000. Empowerment theory. Psychological, organizational and community levels of analysis. In Rappaport, J. and Seidman, E. (eds), Handbook of Community Psychology. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York, 4364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
37
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

‘The Taste Buddies’: participation and empowerment in a residential home for older people
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

‘The Taste Buddies’: participation and empowerment in a residential home for older people
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

‘The Taste Buddies’: participation and empowerment in a residential home for older people
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *