|Appears in Collections:||Faculty of Social Sciences Journal Articles|
|Peer Review Status:||Refereed|
|Title:||A Comparative Discussion of the Gendered Implications of Cash-for-Care Schemes: Markets, Independence and Social Citizenship in Crisis?|
|Citation:||Rummery K (2009) A Comparative Discussion of the Gendered Implications of Cash-for-Care Schemes: Markets, Independence and Social Citizenship in Crisis?. Social Policy and Administration, 43 (6), pp. 634-648. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9515.2009.00685.x|
|Abstract:||There are moves across many countries away from state-led provision of services for disabled people towards cash-based systems, which have been welcomed by disabled people as increasing choice and control over services and support, and increasing independence and social participation. However, feminist scholars have long warned about the implications of commodifying care for women, and the possible consequences of substituting cash for services for social citizenship have remained underexplored, for both disabled people generally, disabled women and mothers more particularly, and for personal assistants/care workers. This article will attempt to address that gap by carrying out a comparative literature review and policy analysis of the role of policy development and outcomes in cash-for-care schemes, looking comparatively across policy developments in several countries, as well as developed welfare states beyond Europe to examine: (a) the impact of the tensions between various governance levels, particularly local and national government; (b) the gendered impact of such policies on (for example) gendered divisions of paid and unpaid work, citizenship and social participation; (c) the impact such policies have, or are likely to have, on different groups of men and women across the life course and across different social and economic groups; and (d) how such policies can contribute to the well-being and/or detriment of different groups of women (and men) within different social, political, economic and historical contexts.|
|Rights:||The publisher does not allow this work to be made publicly available in this Repository. Please use the Request a Copy feature at the foot of the Repository record to request a copy directly from the author. You can only request a copy if you wish to use this work for your own research or private study.|
|Social Policy and Administration 2009.pdf||Fulltext - Published Version||96.25 kB||Adobe PDF||Under Embargo until 3000-01-01 Request a copy|
Note: If any of the files in this item are currently embargoed, you can request a copy directly from the author by clicking the padlock icon above. However, this facility is dependent on the depositor still being contactable at their original email address.
This item is protected by original copyright
Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
The metadata of the records in the Repository are available under the CC0 public domain dedication: No Rights Reserved https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact email@example.com providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.