The normative constitution of professional power

Area of Science:

• Health policy and regulation
• Political science
• Sociology of health

Background:

• Current discourse on power in healthcare policy frames it as "countervailing power," where one actor imposes its will on another.
• This framework encourages citizen passivity, relying on representatives for healthcare matters.
• This understanding of power is a historical construct, not an inherent truth.

Purpose of the Study:

• To critique the dominant discourse of countervailing power in healthcare.
• To propose an alternative discourse of power as mutual, uncontrollable social interaction.
• To explore how this alternative discourse can foster participatory practices in healthcare.

Main Methods:

• Conceptual analysis of power dynamics in healthcare policy and regulation.
• Discourse analysis of language used to describe power in healthcare.
• Theoretical exploration of alternative models of power and their implications.

Main Results:

• The concept of "countervailing power" in healthcare leads to individual and social passivity.
• An alternative discourse where power is participatory and uncontrollable is possible.
• This participatory power model can encourage greater public involvement in healthcare.

Conclusions:

• Shifting the discourse on power can transform healthcare practices towards greater participation.
• Participatory power blurs lines between professionals and patients, politics and everyday life.
• This shift necessitates mutual sharing of time and energy in all aspects of healthcare, from prevention to long-term care.