Those seeking an inspired approach to continuing care could learn much from the battle disabled people have fought for 30 years to gain more control over their lives. In the second article in our series on visions of the future for continuing care, Jane Campbell reflects on the case for independent living

Why look back when disabled people's empowerment and rights lie in the future? Well, as that great American philosopher and film maker Steven Spielberg showed in his time travel movie Back To The Future, it is vital to assess the past in order to secure a future that does not repeat historical mistakes. So indulge me while we look back at the activities that could set the agenda for future service user empowerment.

There has been much hype this year from the government about its 'great historical achievement on behalf of disabled people' - the Disability Discrimination Act - cited as the jewel in its crown. How strange that it should be so proud of something so unworkable and, in essence, discriminatory, when the real achievement almost passed us by without a whisper.

The real achievement was the Community Care (Direct Payments) Bill, which would enable disabled people to purchase their own care. This is the culmination of a 30-year campaign by disabled people to gain more control over their lives and, in some individuals' cases, freedom from various forms of incarceration.

The dream of self-determined living, for those who rely on social services, may be about to come true and it is a dream which should inform all future thinking on continuing care.

A good recipe for self-determined living has been developed by the disabled people's independent living movement, but it remains to be seen whether the local and health authority cooks can turn it into the desired cake or whether it will be gruel. The first challenge will be to redefine services, and users, from a user perspective.

As we move into the 21st century, the term 'care' has myriad definitions. For some people it implies notions of love, support and safety, but for others it means imprisonment, no rights, and abuse. Likewise, for service providers the term 'independent living' can mean provision of a bath aid, or a day centre place where you learn how to cook, wash and dress; while for others it is helping someone feel in control of their life. In order to move forward from this confusion, the continuing care partnerships of the future would do well to observe how the disabled people's movement has redefined our care needs.

A radical definition of those who receive social care, and the role they should play in future service arrangements, has been developed by disabled people. It has its roots in the struggle to liberate disabled people from institutions in the sixties and seventies, and the consequent challenge to the traditional medical approach to community living services.

The definition is linked to the unprecedented growth of centres for independent/integrated living and the socio-political approach to disability, now commonly referred to as the social model of disability. Centres for independent living are community-based organisations providing a range of services for both disabled and non-disabled people. The important point about CILs is that they are controlled by disabled people themselves, who are responsible for defining policies and delivering services. It was from within this culture that ideologies of independence, which allowed 'real' empowerment, transformed disabled people's lives.

Unfortunately, during the eighties and nineties, the majority of health and social services professionals failed to acknowledge and build on the work of the independent living movement. Instead they crudely applied the terms independent living and empowerment to already well established community care-type policies and services that placed an undue emphasis on professional assessments, functional inability and individual needs.

Social services' independent living resource centres, and a host of other health and social care projects, are viewed quite cynically by the disabled people's movement as a public relations exercise to revamp old and failed practices. They represent distorted interpretations of what it is to have control over your life and to exercise your human and civil rights.

But the new legislation on direct payments gives a second chance to understand past failures. Health and social services agencies now have a golden opportunity to implement the wealth of guidance on user involvement as they pursue their continuing care policies, where joint assessments and decisions concerning social and health support could be made in true partnership with the service recipient. New legislation that promotes independent living as a human rights issue should be thoroughly grasped by all parties.

In the emerging service infrastructure there should be no place for jealous guarding of budgets and information. Disabled people will only join partnerships that promote the health and inclusion of all service users. Services will continue to fail unless disabled people and the mass of expertise they have acquired are central to the development of continuing care.

There are pockets of good practice dotted across the country where service users and their respective organisations are central to decision-making in, for example, the commissioning of services.

These initiatives, combined with our 30-year programme, have culminated in legislation on direct payments which acknowledges our vision for future continuing care. These successes have a common ingredient: disabled people being invited to contribute to policy on an equal footing with others, and receiving the support and respect which turns that equality into more than just the provision of a ramp, an interpreter and travel expenses.

Jane Campbell is an independent living project management consultant.