The impact of the Health and Social Care Act, 2012 on the health and wellbeing of rough sleepers

2016 
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore the impact of the Health and Social Care Act, 2012 on London’s rough sleepers as seen from the perspective of one former homeless service user (currently working as a support worker in a day centre providing outreach and “drop in” facilities for people who are street homeless and other vulnerable adults including female sex workers). The discussion centres on some of the unintended impacts of changes to healthcare commissioning; the new arrangements for patient, public representation; and the enhanced role of local councils. Design/methodology/approach This paper is grounded in front line practitioner reflection/opinion and draws on practical experience and observation at Spires, as well as research and government papers published by other service providers. The aspirations of the Health and Social Care Act, 2012 are set out before its practical application are examined from the rough sleeper’s dimension. Findings Putting clinicians and GPs centre stage in the commissioning and purchasing of healthcare may have some benefits for individual patient choice, but it can also dilute patient public involvement in health and social care with negative effects for vulnerable and excluded groups, including rough sleepers. The terms of reference ascribed to Local Healthwatch Organisations, the official representatives of the people, are narrower than previously and limit their ability to influence official policy. The Act centralises control whilst devolving operational responsibility, especially for public health provision on which rough sleepers often rely. It is suggested that local voluntary organisations and specialist “inclusion” health groups are increasingly being expected to take over responsibility for delivering health and social care and that mainstream collaboration is much reduced rather than enhanced by this fragmentation. Research limitations/implications This review is based on the opinion of an “expert by experience” which may not be representative. Originality/value This is one of few papers which present a front line service user/practitioner perspective on the impact of clinical commissioning on services for marginalised groups.
    • Correction
    • Source
    • Cite
    • Save
    • Machine Reading By IdeaReader
    3
    References
    2
    Citations
    NaN
    KQI
    []