27. August 2019 - 14:30 till 16:30
Share it on:

The Role of Publics in the Formation of Health Policy | University of Wollongong | Tuesday, 27. August 2019

Public advice on models for ongoing public input to health policy
 Readings group on Aug 27, 2019 with Mike Burgess
What should be the role of publics in the formation of health policy? How should members of the public be included, and why?
In this reading group, Professor Burgess will review and lead a discussion of five readings which present arguments and evidence from diverse sources about these complex questions. Come along and join in the conversation about how publics should be involved in shaping health policy.
Prof Burgess has provided the following notes to orient you to each of the readings.

Reading 1: O’Doherty el al (2011)
These authors argue that consent and participatory events are inadequate, and that there is an obligation to develop ongoing public input for the governance of biobanks.
Kieran C. O’Doherty, Michael M. Burgess, Kelly Edwards, Richard P. Gallagher, Alice K. Hawkins, Jane Kaye, Veronica McCaffrey, David E. Winickoff. From consent to institutions: Designing adaptive governance. for genomic biobanks. Social Science & Medicine 73 (2011) 367-374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.05.046

Reading 2: Miller et al (2018)
These authors review the literature related to public engagement in health research systems, setting priorities for the accomplishment of wide public involvement.
Fiona Alice Miller* , Sarah J. Patton, Mark Dobrow and Whitney Berta. Public involvement in health research systems: a governance framework. Health Research Policy and Systems (2018) 16:79. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-018-0352-7

Reading 3: Mitton et al (2019)
These authors (including Burgess) explore the difference between seeking patient vs. public participation, and sketch out their roles in Health Technology Assessment and allocation or priority setting.
Craig Mitton, Brayan V. Seixas, Stuart Peacock, Michael Burgess, Stirling Bryan (2019). Health Technology Assessment as Part of a Broader Process for Priority Setting and Resource Allocation. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, First online 03 June. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40258-019-00488-1

Reading 4: Schicktanz et al (2012)
These authors make a series of arguments that bioethics requires deliberative public engagement in order to develop legitimate ethical advice.
Silke Schicktanz, Mark Schweda, Brian Wynne (2012). The ethics of ‘public understanding of ethics’—why and how bioethics expertise should include public and patients’ voices. Med Health Care and Philos 15:129–139. DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-011-9321-4

Reading 5: Warren (2016)
In this final reading, the author, a political scientist, defends the idea that governance-driven democratisation is full of potential, but also carries significant risks that must be mitigated and assessed.
Mark E. Warren. Governance-driven democratization. Critical Policy Studies 3 (2009): 3-13. https://www-tandfonline-com.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/doi/full/10.1080/19460170903158040?scroll=top&needAccess=true