3 results
Contributors
-
- By Rony A. Adam, Gloria Bachmann, Nichole M. Barker, Randall B. Barnes, John Bennett, Inbar Ben-Shachar, Jonathan S. Berek, Sarah L. Berga, Monica W. Best, Eric J. Bieber, Frank M. Biro, Shan Biscette, Anita K. Blanchard, Candace Brown, Ronald T. Burkman, Joseph Buscema, John E. Buster, Michael Byas-Smith, Sandra Ann Carson, Judy C. Chang, Annie N. Y. Cheung, Mindy S. Christianson, Karishma Circelli, Daniel L. Clarke-Pearson, Larry J. Copeland, Bryan D. Cowan, Navneet Dhillon, Michael P. Diamond, Conception Diaz-Arrastia, Nicole M. Donnellan, Michael L. Eisenberg, Eric Eisenhauer, Sebastian Faro, J. Stuart Ferriss, Lisa C. Flowers, Susan J. Freeman, Leda Gattoc, Claudine Marie Gayle, Timothy M. Geiger, Jennifer S. Gell, Alan N. Gordon, Victoria L. Green, Jon K. Hathaway, Enrique Hernandez, S. Paige Hertweck, Randall S. Hines, Ira R. Horowitz, Fred M. Howard, William W. Hurd, Fidan Israfilbayli, Denise J. Jamieson, Carolyn R. Jaslow, Erika B. Johnston-MacAnanny, Rohna M. Kearney, Namita Khanna, Caroline C. King, Jeremy A. King, Ira J. Kodner, Tamara Kolev, Athena P. Kourtis, S. Robert Kovac, Ertug Kovanci, William H. Kutteh, Eduardo Lara-Torre, Pallavi Latthe, Herschel W. Lawson, Ronald L. Levine, Frank W. Ling, Larry I. Lipshultz, Steven D. McCarus, Robert McLellan, Shruti Malik, Suketu M. Mansuria, Mohamed K. Mehasseb, Pamela J. Murray, Saloney Nazeer, Farr R. Nezhat, Hextan Y. S. Ngan, Gina M. Northington, Peggy A. Norton, Ruth M. O'Regan, Kristiina Parviainen, Resad P. Pasic, Tanja Pejovic, K. Ulrich Petry, Nancy A. Phillips, Ashish Pradhan, Elizabeth E. Puscheck, Suneetha Rachaneni, Devon M. Ramaeker, David B. Redwine, Robert L. Reid, Carla P. Roberts, Walter Romano, Peter G. Rose, Robert L. Rosenfield, Shon P. Rowan, Mack T. Ruffin, Janice M. Rymer, Evis Sala, Ritu Salani, Joseph S. Sanfilippo, Mahmood I. Shafi, Roger P. Smith, Meredith L. Snook, Thomas E. Snyder, Mary D. Stephenson, Thomas G. Stovall, Richard L. Sweet, Philip M. Toozs-Hobson, Togas Tulandi, Elizabeth R. Unger, Denise S. Uyar, Marion S. Verp, Rahi Victory, Tamara J. Vokes, Michelle J. Washington, Katharine O'Connell White, Paul E. Wise, Frank M. Wittmaack, Miya P. Yamamoto, Christine Yu, Howard A. Zacur
- Edited by Eric J. Bieber, Joseph S. Sanfilippo, University of Pittsburgh, Ira R. Horowitz, Emory University, Atlanta, Mahmood I. Shafi
-
- Book:
- Clinical Gynecology
- Published online:
- 05 April 2015
- Print publication:
- 23 April 2015, pp viii-xiv
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
eleven - Participation and social justice
- Edited by Ian Greener, Chris Holden, Majella Kilkey, University of Sheffield
-
- Book:
- Social Policy Review 22
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 01 September 2022
- Print publication:
- 13 July 2010, pp 253-274
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
Advocacy of participation by ‘the public’ and of service users in decision making about public policy and services has multiple origins. In the late 1980s it was claimed by sections of the Left as a radical idea that would renew the public sector in order to resist attacks from Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and others who sought to replace public services with private markets (Deakin and Wright, 1990). In contrast, for the neoliberals of the political Right, consumerist strategies were a way of limiting the power of professionals and rolling back the state. Creating active consumers was part of the strategy of market making. For New Labour in government, initiatives to involve the public and service users have reflected aspirations to improve services, create more assertive consumers, enable more accountability and to generate greater legitimacy for public service decision making (Barnes et al, 2004). For users of welfare services and for deprived and disadvantaged communities the right to have a say about services and policies is a matter of civil rights and social justice (for example, Beresford et al, 1999). From whatever perspective, changes in public service governance and service delivery that have taken place over the last 20–30 years represent a substantially different way of imagining the relationship between the state and its citizens from that which characterised the first 20–30 years of the welfare state.
One group of people who have both demanded and been invited to have their say is those who use mental health services. Colin Gell argues the importance of this:
a Because any business or service that does not enable this will not meet what it set out to do and could potentially lose its business. The development of Foundation Trusts could see competition increase and inappropriate trusts could be shunned by commissioners.
b The most successful businesses regularly ask their customers about what they want. M&S and Tesco are always asking their customers.
Most importantly it is morally right that organisations that use our money should be accountable to us, particularly those providing health and social care. Instinctively most service users know what is right for them and what is not.
Use of a Common, Inter-Sectoral Template for Observer Reports of Crises
- Per E. Kulling, Hans Andersson, Thomas Gell, Christina Nordensten, Susannah Sigurdsson
-
- Journal:
- Prehospital and Disaster Medicine / Volume 24 / Issue S1 / February 2009
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 17 February 2017, p. s146
- Print publication:
- February 2009
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Introduction:
The use of a common template for observer studies is a way of structuring the experiences gained (lessons observed and learned) from such studies. This facilitates the comparison of reports within one's own field as well as between different sectors. It also facilitates the implementation of joint observer activities and joint observer reports, promoting more comprehensive and holistic learning from the events.
Methods:Using the Utstein method for studying disasters and the Swedish Disaster Medicine study organization (KAMEDO) as an inspiration, a number of Swedish governmental authorities and organizations compiled a template for presenting standardized observer reports. The following tides have been identified to be included: (1) Tide; (2) Preface; (3) Observers and Authors; (4) Summary and Experiences; (5) Introduction/Material and Methods; (6) Hazard; (7) Background (including pre-event status and preparedness); (8) Event; (9) Damage; (10) Disturbances; (11) Responses; (12) Recovery and Development; (13) Discussion; (14) References; (15) Appendices; (16) Keywords; (17) Index; and (18) Abbreviations.
Results:This template has been used successfully for observer studies within the health sector (evacuation of Swedes from the war in Lebanon, 2006, a power supply failure at a major university hospital in Stockholm, 2007), within the food sector (Cryptosporidium contamination of water supply in Ireland, 2007, consequences for water supply from floods in the UK, 2007, sewage contamination of water supply in Finland, 2007) and within crisis management and rescue services sectors (floods in the UK, 2007, sewage contamination of water supply in Finland, 2007, wild fires in California, 2007)
Conclusions:The use of a common, standardized template for the documentation of lessons observed and learned from major disasters/crises has proven useful. In addition to enhancing the completeness and learning value of the reports, it also has proven to be a useful tool for stimulating intra-sectoral cooperation and learning.