116 research outputs found
Social work and self-determination.
Get PDFSelf-determination is a curious concept, related to, but not quite the same as, freedom and autonomy. As an ethical principle, the principle of self-determination bears little relationship to the way social workers behave. It is used as if clients were being allowed a free, independent choice; but clients are subject to pressure, and the social work relationship is often conceived within a structure of authority. As a guide to practice, the concept of self-determination ignores the cases where direction is legitimate or desirable. Self-determination can be seen as a professional ideology - an inter-related set of values and ideas. The concept is derived from a number of ideas and values outside social work, but it appears to have little direct relevance to social work in practice. The paper suggests that the concept of freedom may be more useful and less remote from the realities than self-detemination is
Developing indicators: issues in the use of quantitative data about poverty.
Get PDFIndicators are often confused with measures. This article argues that precise measurement is often inappropriate in relation to complex, multidimensional issues such as poverty. A good indicator should be understood as a pointer, not a measure. It should be accessible, robust and reinforced by other pointers. By treating indicators as quantities, summary indices conceal key issues, hide the values and concepts implicit in the exercise, and are vulnerable to mathematical accident. Using multiple indicators is sounder in principle, in methodological terms, and in practical application
Concepts of need in housing allocation.
Get PDFPolicies for the allocation of council housing are subject to considerable local variation. Despite the differences, the schemes which housing departments have developed seem often to reflect a common understanding of the concept of 'need'. Their emphasis is on an individual, material, absolute idea of 'need' which depends strongly on conventional interpretation to determine what is included and what is not. The values expressed in explicit policies form part of an ideology of need, in the sense that they constitute an inter-related set of ideas commonly shared within a profession. This ideology is based less in the implementation of common principles than the constraints of practice
Poverty as a wicked problem.
Get PDFThis brief argues for a pragmatic approach to poverty, rather than an analytical one: 1. Poverty is a wicked issue - complex, multidimensional, unclear and changeable. There is not one problem to be addressed. If we are not dealing with a set, specific problem, or even a defined process, there is little point in chasing after definitive, mechanistic answers. 2. There are some common misunderstandings about anti-poverty policy. The first is the belief that we can prevent poverty by identifying and dealing with its causes, or the 'generative mechanisms' that lead to people being poor; this has led to a long series of bad policies. The second misconception is to suppose that if we know what causes the problems, we will know how to stop them; the way into a problem is not usually the way out of it. Neither position is tenable, and too often they have led policy astray. 3. The problems are not going to sit there waiting for someone to solve them, so that they can be picked off one by one; new problems and issues are arising all the time. Poverty is dynamic - constantly shifting and changing, as an enormous range of processes coincide and collide. 4. One of the central insights offered by the emphasis on poverty as a multidimensional issue has been to emphasise the importance of the perceptions, experience and voice of people who suffer it, as a way of clarifying issues and developing priorities
The nature of a public service.
Get PDFPublic services have been misunderstood. They are not simply services in the public sector, they are not necessarily there because of market failure, and they cannot be analysed by the same criteria as market-based provision. They have four defining characteristics. They exist for reasons of policy; they provide services to the public; they are redistributive; and they act as a trust. They consequently operate differently from production for profit, in their priorities, costs, capacity and outputs
Economics as practical wisdom.
Get PDFThe discipline of economics has been represented as deductive and theoretical, deductive and empirical, and inductive and empirical. All of these approaches have been subject to withering criticism in other social sciences: their weaknesses are theoretical, evidential and methodological. Part of the problem rests in the interpretative or prescriptive character of much that is written in economics, but the core rests in the attempt to generalise about economic processes beyond the context where they occur. The situation where an economic insight is applied cannot be bracketed off, or set aside, from its context and the influence of other factors; the process of generalisation does not of itself provide useful prescriptions for policy. The principles of phronesis are based in experiential knowledge and practice. Economics has to adapt to complexity and ethical considerations, relying on judgement in particular contexts rather than generalisation. It is a phronetic activity
Introducing Universal Credit.
Get PDFIn this chapter, author Paul Spicker interrogates the government's introduction of Universal Credit, a controversial scheme designed to unify various means-tested benefits for people of working age. The scheme brings together six existing benefits: income-related Jobseeker's Allowance and Employment and Support Allowance, Working Tax Credit and Child Tax Credit, Housing Benefit and Income Support. Spicker argues that analysts of Universal Credit must drill down to the detail of the scheme and the benefits that it covers. He sees defects in 'the concept and design' of the Universal Credit agenda, as there were in previous grand schemes in social policy history. He also sees potential for the benefit system to break down if it cannot prove to be practically viable. Governments, Spicker contends, cannot easily meet the multiple objectives that must be typically met in 'simple' and 'unified' benefit programmes
Five types of complexity.
Get PDFThis article describes five types of complexity in the operation of social security benefits. The first is intrinsic complexity: some benefits are complex in their concept, structure or operation. The second is extrinsic: systems become complicated when several benefits or agencies have to be dealt with. Third, there are complex rules. Some are imposed for administrative reasons, but there may also be some 'conditionality', including moral conditions and rules about rationing. Fourth, there are complex management systems, including the proliferation of agencies and the problems of information management. Finally, there is complexity that arises through the situation of claimants. Benefits which try to adjust to people's changing circumstances require elaborate rules and procedures, and they are always slightly out of step. If we want to simplify benefits, we need to focus on conditionality, administrative rules and management procedures. Some aspects of complexity, however, are unavoidable
Equality versus solidarity.
Get PDFAlthough equality and solidarity are often thought of as constituent parts of the same ideological framework, there are inconsistencies between them. Both concepts refer to a range of meanings: equality can refer to equal treatment, opportunity or result, and solidarity, a term which is of growing influence in European social policy, can refer to mutual aid or group cohesion. Despite the close association of these ideas in theory, there is a tension between them, and they offer prescriptions for policy which are likely to conflict. British pensions policy is taken as an illustration; the case for solidaristic redistribution has had to be balanced against that for egalitarian policies, with some unpredictable results. The concepts of equality and solidarity can be reconciled, but this depends on the application of a set of limiting interpretations; they can just as easily be represented as incompatible
Stigma and social welfare.
Get PDFThis book looks at the concept of stigma in the context of social welfare. The idea of 'social welfare' is commonly identified with the 'social services'. Both terms are regrettably unclear. 'Welfare' can be taken to mean 'relief'; a 'welfare recipient' is someone who receives a monetary allowance. Secondly, 'welfare' refers to individual well-being; in economics, 'social welfare' refers to the overall well-being of a society. Thirdly, it signifies a pattern of organised activities equivalent to the social services (Butterworth, Holman, 1975, 15). This is the principal use of the term in studies of social administration. Social welfareis an omnibus term used to cover a wide range of activities in society. These activities are concerned with the maintenance or promotion of social well-being. (Ibid, 14) This is a very wide concept. 'Social well-being' covers anything that could be argued to be good for society. All collectively provided services, Titmuss writes, are deliberately designed to meet socially recognised needs (1955, 39). ('Need' is used to signify those things which are deemed essential for the well-being of individuals or groups.) But not all services provided on this basis are social services: the army is an obvious example. The needs that are dealt with are of a specific kind. The services which are most commonly accepted in Britain as being social services are health, housing, education, social security and social work. They have in common, not only that they provide for needs, but that people receive directly a good or a service from them and are therefore dependent. Titmuss refers to states of dependency which are recognised as collective responsibilities (1955, 42-3). These include injury, disease, disability, old age, childhood, maternity and unemployment. People in these circumstances rely on socially provided goods and services, and it is this reliance which is the distinguishing characteristic of social welfare and the social services. Eyden writes that A social service is a social institution that has developed to meet the personal needs of individual members of society not adequately or effectively met by either the individual from his own or his family's resources or by commercial or industrial concerns. (in Byrne, Padfield, 1978, 1) This definition implies, firstly, that the social services respond to individual need; and secondly, that they do so only when other methods have failed. This is true of some services, but not of others: education, or health, are accepted as social services, but are provided without regard to other resources which could meet the need. Greve (1971), by contrast, cites a definition of a social service from a UN report: lt is an organized activity that aims at helping towards a mutual adjustment of individuals and their social environment. This objective is achieved through the use of techniques and methods which are designed to enable individuals, groups and communities to solve their problems of adjustment to a changing pattern of society, and through co-operatlve action to improve economic and social conditions. (Greve, 1971, 184-5) The definition, Greve notes, makes three points. The first is that the provision of social services is not simply a transaction in which a passive person receives bounty (in the form of cash, kind or counselling) from the rest of the community. Nor, as many still think, is a social service concerned to get people to adjust unilaterally to society or to their possibly squalid environment. ... society must also adjust to the individual. (Ibld, p 185 ) The second point is that social services help groups and communities, not only individuals. Eyden suggested that social services were individual and residual. But dependency is not necessarily a feature of individuals: a group or community may be collectively dependent. The third point is that there is a 'positive, developmental function' pursued through'co-operative action'.This is a good definition, but it has its weaknesses. Its essential flaw is that it is prescriptive rather than descriptive. It puts great emphasis on self-determination either by enabling people to meet their needs, or by cooperative action - when the relationship may be one of passive dependency. It emphasises mutual adjustment, whereas the reality may be a matter of social control. The concept of dependency does not in itself imply either adjustment or control, or determine a developmental function; but it is consistent with them, as it is consistent with other policies. A social service can be defined as a social institution which is developed to provide for those conditions of dependency which are recognised as collective responsibilities. This is a restricted definition, but I believe it reflects the actual use of the term. Housing, health, social security, education and social work are social services because they deal with conditions of dependency. Urban planning, road building, libraries and the police force do not. This is the distinction between social and public services. The distinction may seem irrational, and in some ways it is. The study of social policy has moved increasingly towards treating them on an equivalent basis; but 'social policy', which takes in any policy affecting relations in society, is a wider concept than a study of the social services. The distinction is not completely arbitrary; states of dependency do present a distinctive set of problems, and those problems are central to this study. 'Social welfare' is not used quite synonymously with 'social services', although the terms are very close: references to 'social welfare services' can be found (e.g. Reisman, 1977, 50), which seem to mean, not services to promote welfare, but rather services which perform the function called 'social welfare'. Social welfare can be defined as organised activity to improve the condition of people who are dependent. Stigma and social welfare Stigma is an important concept in the study of social administration; it has been described as the central issue (Pinker, 1971, 136). A stigma marks the recipient of welfare, damages his reputation, and undermines his dignity. It is a barrier to access to social services, and an experience of degradation and rejection. The imposition of stigma, Pinker writes, is the commonest form of violence used in democratic societies. (1971, 175). Although some sociologists have tried to claim it for their own (e.g. Lemert, 1972, 15), 'stigma' is not an academic term; people who are embarrassed or ashamed of their dependency on social services use the word to describe their feelings. An unemployed miner talks about the stigma of going up to the dole every week, I think it's awful. (cited Gould, Kenyon, 1972, 21) A tenant of a 'sink' estate says, It is stigmatised ... You felt ashamed to say you were from Abbeyhills, because of the stigma. (Flessati, 1978) A person who had been committed to a mental institution for three days ln 1935 wrote to a Royal Commission more than twenty years later asking to get my name off your registers so that I no longer bear the stigma of being a certified person. (Cmnd.169, 1957, 97) And a recipient of Supplementary Benefit complains, It's shame, the stigma of it. Richardson, Naidoo, 1978, 27) 'Stigma' is a part of common speech; and, like many other common words, it has no precise definition, but is used in a way that assumes other people will understand it. Exposition of the concept has been limited, and the idea has been accepted, for the most part, uncritically. References to 'stigma' ln studies of social administration tend to be made in passing; they are asserted, without the benefit of reason or evidence. I have built up an argument, in many places, on the basis of references like these - a short passage from one book, a phrase from another - in order to illustrate both the way the idea is used, and some of the underlying assumptions made about it. The result is, I hope, rather more than a selective review; it is an attempt to clarify the different uses of the word, to establish whether a coherent concept can be constructed, and to see what the implications of the idea of stigma are for social policy
- …
