The Limits of Social Prescribing

Social prescribing has been a hot topic in Belong in Plymouth discussions—but not without critique. In early 2023, team members revisited the model’s limitations.

Karen Pilkington summed it up: “If there’s no community group left, then there’s nowhere for link workers to send people!”

The insight hit home. While the concept of linking people from clinical care into community support is sound, it often rests on shaky foundations. Many community organisations are overstretched and underfunded, unable to absorb increased demand.

This spurred a rethink. The project began to talk about social prescribing not as an endpoint—but as one small part of a broader ‘care economy’. What would it mean to create a system where community groups are not just recipients of referrals, but co-designers of health and wellbeing pathways?

The team also highlighted relational infrastructure as a missing link. “It’s not just about having a directory,” one participant noted. “It’s about knowing who to call, and when, and why.”

Belong in Plymouth continues to explore how relational, community-rooted approaches can complement statutory systems—not replace them. The question isn’t whether social prescribing is useful—it’s whether the system around it is ready to do the work it promises.

Until then, the message is clear: community groups aren’t just nice to have. They’re the infrastructure of care—and they need to be treated as such.