In late January I attended the inaugural Social Prescribing Network Conference held in central London and hosted by the University of Westminster, College of Medicine and the Wellcome Trust.
Social prescribing is not a new idea – it is a means of enabling primary care services to refer patients with social, emotional or practical needs to a range of local, non-clinical services, often provided by the voluntary and community sector. It is most commonly used with patients with a mental health or long term condition. You may have come across it in a variety of other guises such as books on prescription or the University College London’s Museums on Prescriptions project. The conference was the first UK meeting of practitioners, GP’s, academics and others with an interest in social prescribing. The day focused on a variety of issues some around definition others on integrating non-clinical services with primary care, regulations and standards, creating quality provision and current research in the field.
Some of the key people present were Dan Hopewell (Bromley by Bow Centre), Alyson MacGregor ( Altogether Better), Marie Polley (University of Westminster), Chris Drinkwater (retired GP), Lev Pedro (National Council for Voluntary Organisations), Nick Herbert (University of Westminster), and Richard Kimberlee (University West of England). Throughout the day I met people working with a variety of therapeutic models – ecological, art and complimentary among others. They showed the vast array of interventions that help improve a person’s health and well-being. Participants spoke about the difficulty of working with GPs who had been educated in and lived the medical model. Some GP’s present openly criticised the faith we have in them referring to, for example, the ways prescribed medicines are either not taken or are taken incorrectly and the amount of medical research that offers no clear solution to a particular health problem. Social prescribing was seen as the “trojan horse” within the traditional medical model where “subversive commissioning” could occur and patients gain access to services such as complimentary therapies which would not have been commissioned directly by the local CCG.
The day also looked at what social prescribing would mean for the voluntary sector. Voluntary and community groups run most of the projects which patients are referred to. This places VCS at the core of any sustainable social prescribing project. What this meant in the current austere climate where VCS organisations were struggling to stay afloat was a point that remained moot.
It was an invigorating and optimistic conference. There was a feeling that we were at the tipping point where social prescribing would enter into the mainstream. Conference attendees overwhelming agreed that a faculty of social prescribing should be founded.
This month the London Voluntary Service Council are surveying social prescribing projects in London and in March the National Association for Voluntary and Community Action have a member event for organisations who are already delivering or looking to support delivery of social prescribing. We’ll report on these and the implications for the voluntary and community sector in later posts so watch this space!
