Comments on: MAC’s Eight New Laws of LINks – and an acknowledgement to Dr Einstein http://www.publicinvolvement.org.uk/2010/06/mac%e2%80%99s-eight-new-laws-of-links-%e2%80%93-and-an-acknowledgement-to-dr-einstein/ Public and User Involvement Sun, 05 Feb 2012 23:24:13 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Jeremy Taylor http://www.publicinvolvement.org.uk/2010/06/mac%e2%80%99s-eight-new-laws-of-links-%e2%80%93-and-an-acknowledgement-to-dr-einstein/comment-page-1/#comment-849 Jeremy Taylor Fri, 25 Jun 2010 18:48:22 +0000 http://www.mooreadamsoncraig.co.uk/wp/?p=1760#comment-849 Andrew, well done for unearthing this material. There seem to be two different models of local citizen involvement. One in "inspectorial" and seems to be what is informing HealthWatch. The other is more about commnunity engagement - providing a bridge between communities and their health and care services. Some questions: which has more impact - instinctively I tend to the engagement model, but is there any evidential backing? are the models compatible or exclusive? are we missing a trick focussing on LINKs when other models - eg FT members and governors, bottom up organisations such as Patients Council - seem to be able to mobilise larger numbers of people? Jeremy Taylor, National Voices Andrew, well done for unearthing this material. There seem to be two different models of local citizen involvement. One in “inspectorial” and seems to be what is informing HealthWatch. The other is more about commnunity engagement – providing a bridge between communities and their health and care services. Some questions:

which has more impact – instinctively I tend to the engagement model, but is there any evidential backing?

are the models compatible or exclusive?

are we missing a trick focussing on LINKs when other models – eg FT members and governors, bottom up organisations such as Patients Council – seem to be able to mobilise larger numbers of people?

Jeremy Taylor, National Voices

]]>