Potter Deborah Anne
University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky, USA
Qual Health Res. 2016 Feb;26(3):426-37. doi: 10.1177/1049732315570127. Epub 2015 Feb 2.
Publicly funded programs in many industrialized countries increasingly require the participation of citizens. In this article, I explore the "situated motives" of family members who participated alongside professionals in implementing children's mental health programs in two communities in the United States. I conducted in-depth interviews with family members and observed monthly meetings of Community Collaboratives to assess how family members understood their participation. The inductive data analysis demonstrates that family members participated (a) as a therapeutic outlet, (b) to pay it forward, (c) to gain new skills, (d) to have a voice, and/or (e) to empower the community. I then use Giddens' concepts of "life politics" and "emancipatory politics" to explore how these accounts variously reflected lay members' orientations as consumers, empowered individuals, and/or citizen advocates. In the absence of articulated and specific objectives for family participation, these "situated motives" were salient and had implications for how policy was implemented.
在许多工业化国家，由公共资金资助的项目越来越需要公民的参与。在本文中，我探讨了在美国两个社区中，与专业人员一起参与儿童心理健康项目实施的家庭成员的“情境动机”。我对家庭成员进行了深入访谈，并观察了社区合作组织的月度会议，以评估家庭成员如何理解他们的参与。归纳数据分析表明，家庭成员参与的动机包括：（a）作为一种治疗途径；（b）传递爱心；（c）获得新技能；（d）拥有发言权；和/或（e）增强社区权能。然后，我运用吉登斯的“生活政治”和“解放政治”概念，探讨这些叙述如何以不同方式反映了普通成员作为消费者、赋权个体和/或公民倡导者的取向。在缺乏明确和具体的家庭参与目标的情况下，这些“情境动机”很突出，并对政策的实施产生了影响。
