'Our hands are bound': Pathways to community health labour in Kenya.

An ideal model of Community Health Worker (CHW) selection has existed since long before Alma Ata catalysed the community health approach, dating to late colonial times. In this model, a willing, trusted, relatively well-educated and secure member of the community with proven aptitude is openly elected by their leadership, peers or relevant committee. Their participation is entirely voluntary and that voluntarism is symbolic of their community's participation as a whole. While this imagery is long-embedded in CHW storytelling, such practice is rare. While elements of this 'model pathway' exist, a myriad of structural and agential factors shape who becomes a CHW, how and why. Through life history interviews over twelve months 2022-2023 with 68 CHWs in Isiolo, northern Kenya (known as CHVs), we explore predominant pathways to community health labour as told through stories. We articulate five such pathways: model, handpicked, shadow, outsider and, most importantly, dispossession. Through telling five CHVs' stories, we present each 'ideal type' but also explore how each pathway is not singular, rather overlapping in complex, context-specific ways. These pathways confound Western-centric, Western-promoted notions of voluntarism and indeed community health, which cannot explain why such labour endures. We conclude that our findings provide a timely commentary on how voluntary labour within health continues to tax structural poverty and frustrated life chances in lieu of concrete and expansive investments in human resources for health by governments and health agencies both North and South. In understanding voluntary labour as a form of structural violence, we can better elucidate the historical dependency on this work in impoverished regions and how the undervaluing of such work persists over time.

Legitimating complementary therapies in the NHS: Campaigning, care and epistemic labour.

Questions of legitimacy loom large in debates about the funding and regulation of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in contemporary health systems. CAM's growth in popularity is often portrayed as a potential clash between clinical, state and scientific legitimacies and legitimacy derived from the broader public. CAM's 'publics', however, are often backgrounded in studies of the legitimacy of CAM and present only as a barometer of the legitimating efforts of others. This article foregrounds the epistemic work of one public's effort to legitimate CAM within the UK's National Health Service: the campaign to 'save' Glasgow's Centre for Integrative Care (CIC). Campaigners skilfully intertwined 'experiential' knowledge of the value of CIC care with 'credentialed' knowledge regarding best clinical and managerial practice. They did so in ways that were pragmatic as well as purist, reformist as well as oppositional. We argue for legitimation as negotiated practice over legitimacy as a stable state, and as labour borne by various publics as they insert themselves into matrices of knowledge production and decision-making within wider health care governance.