Trust and risk

PhD life continues and I’ve had a blast in the RCVS archives this summer, but as term is in full swing, I’m back to checking in on other schools’ courses and seeing what I can learn from them.

As a PhD student I get to dip into other postgrad courses. It’s almost like the Trivial Pursuit degree we dreamed of as undergrads, where you could take a module from each school and create your own degree of interest.

So far I’ve dropped into history of science and medicine options, but decided to expand my options – which led me to social policy.

Trusted?

Kent has a social policy and research school, and I dropped into a session on trust in health care, which introduced me to the models of trust and risk in health care.

Models of health care vary hugely as we know from the types we use. However, add into the mix state/government needs and the huge finances involved, and the models take on a whole new dimension.

For example, discussions of risk in an article published on STAT focus squarely on the health care organisations taking on the responsibility for health care. There is little consideration of the part a patient or group of patients can play. A risk model may seem a “safer” way to consider spending huge amounts of money, but what of agency and personal representation?

An article on GOV.UK covers the basic organisation of the NHS in England. It spells out the way health care is provided at local and national level, and what a patient can expect. It also shows the regulation of certain aspects of health care to encourage trust in the process. However, the process is still risk based and the patients’ agency still is hard to identify.

In veterinary I’m hoping we are working with our clients in a trust capacity. The recent SVN survey highlighted a positive trend that SVNs felt the public and clients had great trust in us, and value our role. So, are we operating a trust health care model? Is this better than a risk-focused model?

Policy creation

The standing literature has, as usual, an NHS/state-funded approach, so it may be hard to apply these directly to veterinary care in the UK. However, as clients’ trust in the professions remains high, should we continue to focus on this positive when considering policy for regulation?

We have the honour of being self-regulated, so should RCVS committee members be in tune with the issues of risk and trust as models of health care systems?

Positive thinking

I’m speaking here as an intrigued PhD student, rather than as an RCVS council member. I can see that, as a framework with which to view RCVS committee work and processes for elected members, perhaps risk and trust are key areas to consider?

It’s certainly got me thinking – and thinking positively – about our professions and the future. This year has been yet another tough one and we’ve all been affected, so leaving 2021 with a little positivity to reflect on might be good?

We have trust and that’s hard to gain, but we have it and deserve it. You’re the best!