98 Benefits Number 43 • Volume 13 • Issue 2 Disability: rights, work and security Marilyn Howard Disability is a complex and contested issue, often with tensions between policy approaches of ‘benefits’ and ‘rights’, that is, benefits as compensation for exclusion rather than civil rights to enable inclusion (Daniel, 1998). These intersect with different models of disability (medical, social and transactional: Howard, 2003). Traditionally, the medical model has been the ‘moral basis’ for benefits (SSAC, 1997), although increasingly the social model is accepted
163 Why have disability categories in social security? Deborah Mabbett The specification of categories (for example, unemployment, old age, disability) is a well-established feature of social security. However, disability categories are problematic: the evidence on which decisions have to be made is complex, and understandings of the nature of disability are highly contested. Disability categories could be reformed by unification with other categories used in the same policy area (for example, unemployment) or by fragmentation into new, smaller categories
Key messages Public survey evidence produces official portraits of disability and also hidden figures of disabled people. No one model of disability offers a complete depiction of the diverse lived realities for disabled people. Each model casts some light and shadows on the multiplicity of experiences of disabled people. During the COVID-19 global pandemic we can observe a damning revelation of the dire conditions of the uncounted disabled and poorly supported disabled, particularly the homeless and seniors in long-term care facilities and nursing
175 Disability Working Allowance: what was the point? Norman Cockett Disability Working Allowance (DWA) was introduced in 1992 as a benefit to top up the wages of disabled people working 16 hours a week or more. This was the first major attempt, within UK social security policy, to help disabled people take up and remain in paid jobs. The formal evaluation of DWA suggested that the benefit had failed in a number of respects. The purpose of this article is to reflect on what was achieved by introducing DWA. The author looks at the stated objectives and other
113 FIVE Disability and housing This chapter comments on housing circumstances for disabled people, considers market and non-market provision, discusses universal and inclusive standards, and concludes with observations about change, citizenship and self-management. First, however, we position ourselves in relation to general debates about disabling environments, and emphasise the importance of disabled people’s ideas and campaigns. Disability is understood below as something resulting from persistent devaluing of people with impairments, their exclusion from
113 SEVEN Housing and disability: a 21st-century phenomenon Conventional accounts of housing careers and even housing pathways present, in some ways, a monochromatic view of households and the housing they occupy. The concept of a housing career holds cogency for young, middle-class household members of Anglo-Celtic backgrounds born in the 1950s, but sheds little light on the more complex realities of households in the 21st century. One of the areas where this gap is most acute is in our understanding of the relationship between disability, households and
disabilities, in the state of Mato Grosso do Sul (MS). We briefly draw on conceptualisations of Indigenous persons, disability and children, and review national and international legislation that deals with the rights of children, Indigenous people and people with disabilities, to identify how the legislation addresses the issue. This also serves to present the normative framework for these topics as currently in force in Brazil. We then introduce the Kaiowá and Guarani people, inhabitants of the region of Dourados in the state of MS, in central-western Brazil, offering a
Introduction In this article we look at systemic violence: the ‘life-shattering violence caused by decisions that are made in parliamentary chambers and government offices’ ( Cooper and Whyte, 2017 : 1) with regard to people with severe disabilities who are in receipt of disability benefits in the UK. We explore how this systemic violence is intrinsic to the political and social practices of maintaining a neoliberal welfare regime, with its predisposition towards the harmful targeting of populations on the wrong side of inequality, unable to meet the demands
Issues of ‘difference’ are on the agenda right across the social sciences, and are encountered daily by practitioners in policy fields. A central question is how the welfare state and its institutions respond to impairment, ethnicity and gender. This book provides an invaluable overview of key issues set in the context of housing.
Touching on concerns ranging from minority ethnic housing needs to the housing implications of domestic violence, this broad-ranging study shows how difference is regulated in housing. It deploys a distinctive theoretical perspective which is applicable to other aspects of the welfare state, and bridges the agency/structure divide.
Housing, social policy and difference: brings disability, ethnicity and gender into the centre of an analysis of housing policies and practices; offers a new approach to housing, informed by recent theoretical debates about agency, structure and diversity; develops the ideas of ‘difference within difference’ and ‘social regulation’; looks beyond the concerns of postmodernism to create an original account of difference and structure within the welfare state.
The book will be an important text for students and researchers in housing, social policy, planning, urban studies, sociology, disability studies, gender studies and ethnic relations. It will also interest practitioners committed to greater equalities of opportunities and a fairer society.
Policy & Politics vol 30 no 3 387 © The Policy Press, 2002 ISSN 0305 5736 English Mental health service users/survivors are subject to both mental health and disability policies, yet there appears to be an ambiguity in the approach of disability policy and disability politics to them. Mental health policy, which has always had powers to restrict their rights, is now increasingly associating mental health service users/survivors with ‘dangerousness’ and focusing on them as a threat to ‘public safety’. Mental health service users’/survivors’ organisations