• J Eval Clin Pract · Apr 2020

    Shared decision making in the social services? Reasons to consider when choosing methods for service user participation.

    • Pia Nykänen.
    • Department of Education, Communication and Learning, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
    • J Eval Clin Pract. 2020 Apr 1; 26 (2): 569-574.

    AbstractUser participation is nowadays a desirable feature of social services work. The International Federation of Social Workers states that staff shall promote the participation of clients so as to "enable them to be empowered in all aspects of decisions and actions affecting their lives." The statement is codified in various national ethical codes; the Swedish Code of Conduct and Ethical Behaviour for Social Workers specifies that interventions shall build on client participation and common agreement. However, a 2012 Swedish governmental report noted that among 16 methods for user participation in the social services, psychiatry, and abuse and addiction care, only one, shared decision making (SDM), had been evaluated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Given this lack of evaluations, how ought professionals to choose between the various methods? The aim of this article is to introduce distinctions in order to answer the question of how social workers ought to choose between different user participation methods, to suggest how this choice could be made, and to argue that the case for SDM seems to be stronger than for other methods. We can distinguish between justificatory, motivational, and explanatory reasons in order to clarify what types of reasons are relevant when choosing between methods. Another distinction concerns general and specific reasons for user participation. No particular method for user participation can inherit its support only from general reasons, since these ordinarily do not point out any method as better than another one. Rather, specific reasons are needed. Social workers do have good reasons for choosing certain methods for user participation rather than others. These methods can be found by looking at specific justificatory reasons. The case for SDM is strengthened by its having been evaluated in RCTs and also because the SDM components harmonize with relevant components in the presented (Swedish) legislation.© 2019 The Authors. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.