Grounded citizens’ juries: a tool for health activism?

Abstract

Involving the public in decision-making has become a bureaucratic pre-occupation for every health agency in the UK. In this paper we offer an innovative approach for local participation in health decision-making through the development of a 'grounded' citizens' jury. We describe the process of one such jury commissioned by a Primary Care Group in the north-west of England, which was located in an area suffering intractable health inequalities. Twelve local people aged between 17 and 70 were recruited to come together for a week to hear evidence, ask questions and debate what they felt would improve the health and well-being of people living in the area. The jury process acted effectively as a grass-roots health needs assessment and amongst other outcomes, resulted in the setting up of a community health centre run by a board consisting of members of the community (including two jurors) together with local agencies. The methodology described here contrasts with that practiced by what we term 'the consultation industry', which is primarily interested in the use of fixed models to generate the public view as a standardized output, a product, developed to serve the needs of an established policy process, with little interest in effecting change. We outline four principles underpinning our approach: deliberation, integration, sustainability and accountability. We argue that citizens' juries and other consultation initiatives need to be reclaimed from that which merely serves the policy process and become 'grounded', a tool for activism, in which local people are agents in the development of policies affecting their lives.