Drug service user groups: Only a partial solution to the problem of developing user involvement

Evaluation of Consumer Participation Demonstration Projects in Five Australian Drug User Treatment Facilities: The Impact of Individual Versus Organizational Stability in Determining Project Progress

“…), the relationship between attitudes and consumer participation is circular (AIVL, 2008). That is, as noted by Patterson et al (2010) in the United Kingdom, any failings of user groups were perceived to reinforce a stereotype that people who use drugs were unable to perform effectively in this setting. In such cases, organizational issues, such as inadequate infrastructure and support, and ill-defined demands on the user groups were not seen as germane to the functioning (and eventual demise) of the user group.…”

“…However, as research from the United Kingdom has noted, there is potential for organizational factors to impede effective programs even in systems where "user involvement" is deemed to be core business of drug user treatment (Patterson et al, 2008). Specifically, there is a need for further analysis of the effect of power iniquities within consumer participation in drug user treatment (Hinton, 2010;Patterson et al, 2010).…”

Consumer participation in drug treatment: a systematic review

“…Here social capital can be built through the bonding of consumers. Bridging social capital or enhancing the connections between different consumers and staff in treatment services can be achieved by consumer training of staff that promotes an understanding of consumer needs and awareness of the importance of mutual respect (Roussy et al, 2015), and well-defined communication channels (Patterson et al, 2010). Engaging diverse groups of consumers in decision making committees within treatment services is key to linking social capital by increasing the degree to which people create relationships with institutions and individuals who have considerable amount of power over them (Woolcock, 2001).…”

“…Other aspects of these organisations included well-defined internal and external communication pathways (Patterson et al, 2010), clearly articulated expectations (Greer et al, 2016), and the provision of feedback on the progress and outcome of consumer requests and suggestions (Patterson et al, 2009b).…”

Serenity Café—on the Road to Recovery Capital

“…Paterson, Weaver, and Crawford (2010) noted that some addictions therapists regard "user involvement" as potentially counter-therapeutic and as exposing "vulnerable users to stressful situations" (p. 92). Those who do need structure become easily frustrated by those who need flexibility, yet each can learn from the other if the timing is right.…”