From participative research to participative practice—a study in youth care

Abstract

In this contribution the development in action research of a participative care practice in youth care is discussed. The study was prompted by the intention of the Flemish government to reform youth care. The initial research-question was how youth care can be organized in such a way that it (also) represents an added value for the client(s). The aim was to find out to what extent the reorganization of youth care could contribute to a social service that enhances a dignified existence for their clients and contributes to a participative care. Hence, the aim of the research was not just to reorganize youth care, but also to develop a participative care practice. The research findings highlight the tension between a reorganization that takes as its starting point an expert way of thinking, and the realization of participative care in which the clients' perspective is taken as central point of departure. Against the background of this tension, the question to what extent care workers actually have room to realize a participative care practice turned out to be one of the most important issues within the research.

Rediscovering Recovery: Reconceptualizing Underlying Assumptions of Citizenship and Interrelated Notions of Care and Support

“…In this perspective, citizenship is shaped through relations where norms have to be renegotiated, performed, refreshed, and reestablished in each situation [23]. As such, rights and responsibilities are actualized and constantly renegotiated through (inter)actions in which contradiction and temporary consensus are vital elements [72]. In this frame of reference, the value of care and support depends on the ongoing engagement of professionals in shaping the relationship between the citizen with mental health problems and everyday society as the terrain of interactions with other people, based on an assumption of interdependency and joint responsibility which is redefined in every situation [73].…”

“…These criteria question the ways in which organizations are structured and function in relation to a diversity of clients and problems as well as in relation to those clients and problems that remain off the picture in a residual perspective because they do not manage to become self-sufficient citizens. According to this theoretical frame of reference, five interrelated features need to be constructed as leverages for (more) equality and quality, defined as availability , accessibility , affordability , usefulness, and comprehensibility [72].

Availability refers to the existence of a supply and to the fact that social services can also be called upon for matters that do not necessarily relate directly to the assessed problem.

Accessibility refers to the (lack of) thresholds when care is needed, for instance an inadequate knowledge of the supply.

…”

Action research, emancipation and design thinking

“…In practice, however, action researchers tend to emphasize interpretation of existing situations, rather than the design and creation of actual change; this is also evident from the empirical contributions to the special issue (e.g. Bostock & Freeman, 2003;Roose & De Bie, 2003;Valkenburg, 2003).…”

Participatory Organizational Change in Community‐Based Health and Human Services: From Tokenism to Political Engagement

“…For decades community psychologists have worked with community-based organizations on building participatory processes involving community members or recipients of services (e.g., Balcazar et al 2001;Perkins et al 1996;Roose and De Bie 2003;Yeich 1996), in self-help groups (e.g., Nelson et al 1998;Zimmerman et al 1991), through board membership (e.g., Bond and Keys 1993), and in coalitions advocating for improved community conditions or better services (e.g., Couto 1998;Speer and Zippay 2005). As an inclusive and equalizing activity, participation holds intrinsic value for the discipline (Nelson et al 2001).…”