Search

Purpose: Self-reliance and social participation are strongly promoted by social policy. Both concepts are linked to the concept of vulnerability, for people who do not meet these standards are labelled "vulnerable people". In this paper, the insider's perspective takes central stage by seeking to explore what it means to be labelled a "vulnerable person", and through this to further our insight into the meaning of the concept of vulnerability. Method: Thirty-three in-depth interviews were conducted with 16 allegedly vulnerable people. The data were subjected to thematic content analysis. Results: Our analysis revealed three main dimensions and eight sub-dimensions of perceived vulnerability, outlining an insider's concept of vulnerability. This concept includes manifestations of vulnerability, feelings coexisting with vulnerability, and the image of vulnerable people. Conclusion: The perception of vulnerability changes when interacting with others in society, especially with social policy implementers. In this interaction, the perceived vulnerability increases and becomes societal vulnerability. It concerns a dependency situation in which one's strength and self-determination are not recognized, and the help needed is not provided. By acknowledging the insider's perspective, social policy can fulfil a more empowering role towards "vulnerable people" and contribute to people's well-being. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents the results of the qualitative phase of Healthy Foundations, a study that groups people according to their motivations to live healthily or otherwise, their lifestyles, and the circumstances that affect this. These segments are ‘Health Conscious Realists’, ‘Balanced Compensators’, ‘Live for Todays’, ‘Unconfident Fatalists’ and ‘Hedonistic Immortals’. The aim was to explore people’s attitudes and motivations to live healthily or otherwise and the targeted healthcare interventions appropriate for each segment. The qualitative phase involved two strands: (i) focus groups and immersion in-depth interviews and (ii) video ethnographic ‘pen portraits’. It provides robust insight into the five segments’ motivations and behaviour and how these are constructed within and influenced by the wider environment. It also enabled the segments to give their views of and design appropriate interventions aligned to their individual requirements, lifestyles and structural environments. It demonstrates the usefulness of the qualitative approach to health segmentations and enhances the case for methodological pluralism, and a critical perspective, to enable development of health-related behaviour change interventions and policy more widely. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]