FROM ENTITLEMENT TO OBLIGATION IN THE AUSTRALIAN WELFARE STATE

This article examines recent debates relating to the provision of welfare in Australia. It starts with an assessment of the trend towards the acceptance of the philosophy of ‘mutual obligation’ by governments, commentators and lobby groups, traces the process of the movement of welfare from ‘entitlement’ to ‘obligation’ and argues that this is being used to justify a reworking of the relationship between citizen and state. The paper argues that a ‘genuine’ mutual obligation has always been part of the Australian welfare system and that, in contrast to the current rhetoric of individual responsibility, it should rather be seen as a community based obligation.     

改革开放30年以来中国医务社会工作的历史回顾、现状与前瞻

(接2012年第5期)五、中国社会福利时代与医务社会工作发展前景2010年是中国社会政策、社会立法、社会管理、社会服务、社会建设与社会福利元年,标志中国总体性社会福利制度,包括国家福利、儿童福利、家庭福利、妇女福利、残障福利、老年人福利、军人福利、社区福利和社会化福利时代来临,以改善民生为重点的社会建设和中国特色社会福利制     

Caregiving in Transition in Southern Europe: Neither Complete Altruists nor Free-riders

In the framework of the SOCCARE Project, focusing on families dealing with a double front of care for children and frail elderly people, similarities can be found in Italy, France and Portugal beyond their different welfare regimes. The comparison of family histories and caregiving strategies, by the methodology of case‐matching, gives an interesting overview of the relationship between the debate on social care and that on the intergenerational contract. The paper aims to understand which are the available combinations of family, informal and institutional resources making a heavy burden of care “acceptable and still normal”: this focuses both typical situations of each country and common features through the countries. The results show how changes in the representations of obligation and duty in the intergenerational pact produce different outcomes and demands in welfare systems. The analysis of shifting boundaries between the public and private spheres in care provides useful policy recommendations, aimed at improving choices and “sustainable” responsibilities of individuals, families and social networks. Sustainable policies seem to be more dependent on family and structural types and resources of networks than on different welfare and services support.     

Risk and its Management in Post-Financial Crisis Hong Kong

In the 1970s and up until the financial crisis occurred in the late 1990s, Hong Kong prospered in a relatively stable social, economic and political context. Since the financial crisis, however, its population has been increasingly exposed to risk: there has been job uncertainty and decreasing capacity for self‐reliance, leading to a growing reliance on public welfare and on families at a time when both are under pressure. The old welfare policies, unable to cope with the new risks, have been replaced by neo‐liberal reforms, redistributing the roles and responsibilities of the individual and the state, with a greater burden falling on the former. Individuals are required to be prudent to manage risk. While these reforms have relieved some of the burden on the state, both new social risk groups and ‘net taxpayers’ considered themselves to have borne disproportional costs. Society is facing serious problems resulting from ineffective old welfare policies, new social risks due to new policies, and the political upheavals arising from increased social conflicts and weakened social cohesion and solidarity. A further complication is that there is no acceptable platform or agent to negotiate a compromise between the polarized groups. This article argues that reliance on publicly funded risk coping strategies or on neo‐liberal risk prevention and mitigation strategies is not a desirable and sustainable policy. A commonly accepted political platform is required to negotiate a compromise which emphasizes shared and balanced roles and responsibilities, and a well‐conceived combination of risk prevention, mitigation and coping strategies.     

Who to Serve? The Ethical Dilemma of Employment Consultants in Nonprofit Disability Employment Network Organisations

The Welfare‐to‐work policy, implemented in July 2006 by the Federal Government, imposed a new work and activity obligation on people applying for the Disability Support Pension. This requirement not only created a new obligation for people with disability but also for employment consultants working in nonprofit Disability Employment Network organisations to monitor the conduct of this new cohort on behalf of Centrelink. For many employment consultants traditionally drawn to the nonprofit disability sector for altruistic reasons, this has created an ethical dilemma between their duty to their employer, and acting in the best interests of their clients. Drawing on aspects of ethical theory we find that, although most employment consultants justify their actions in terms of duty to the organisation, some find themselves in an ethical dilemma of ‘who to serve’ when the interests of the organisation and the welfare of the client are mismatched.     

Relational ethics as a cultural constraint on fathers' parental leave in a Confucian welfare state,South Korea

Promoting fathers' parental leave has recently become of major policy interest in many welfare states. The Korean Government also introduced paid parental leave for working fathers in 2001 and has increasingly strengthened such incentive schemes. However, despite its rapid advancement, fathers' utilisation of parental leave is increasing slowly and most fathers still opt out of their responsibilities for childcare. As sociocultural norms are a primary cause of this low take-up behaviour pattern, this study focuses on the Confucian relational ethics deeply embedded in Korean society. Through in-depth interviews with 15 Korean working couples, this article demonstrates how Confucian relational ethics constrain fathers from enjoying their individual right to parental leave by designating them as last-resort caregivers within families and as forefront workers in the workplace. This study shows the importance of the sociocultural grounding of a society to ordinary citizens when they utilise a social policy in their daily lives.     

Models of Disability, Work and Welfare in Australia

In discourse around disability there has been a shift away from a ‘medical model’, which perceives disability as an individual problem to be ‘cured’ or contained, towards a ‘social model’. The latter focuses on the relationship between people with disabilities and their social environment, locating the required interventions within the realm of social policy and institutional practice. Drawing upon a small qualitative study conducted in Melbourne, this article argues that recent plans by the Australian government to introduce mutual obligation requirements for recipients of the Disability Support Pension (DSP) sit in tension with this shift from the medical to the social models of disability. Mutual obligation is based on the assumption that income support recipients need to be taught how to be more ‘self‐reliant’, to ‘participate’ in society more fully and to become ‘active’, rather than ‘passive’, citizens. This language appears to overlap with that used to articulate a social model, which places emphasis on participation in the community and attempts a shift away from reliance on the medical profession. However, examples from interviews conducted with current and former DSP recipients demonstrate that, in practice, mutual obligation is likely to reinforce a medical model of disability, frame DSP recipients as ‘conditional’ citizens and ignore the obligations of the state and society regarding access and inclusiveness for people with disabilities.     

New social risks in postindustrial society: Some evidence on responses to active labour market policies from Eurobarometer

One result of the complex economic and social changes currently impacting on state welfare is the emergence of what may be termed "new social risks" as part of the shift to a postindustrial society. These concern access to adequately paid employment, particularly for lower-skilled young people, in an increasingly flexible labour market, and managing work-life balance for women with family responsibilities engaged in full-time careers. They coexist with the old social risks that traditional welfare states developed to meet, which typically concern retirement from or interruption to paid work, in most cases for a male "breadwinner". New social risks offer policymakers the opportunity to transform vice into virtue by replacing costly passive benefits with policies which mobilize the workforce, arguably enhancing economic competitiveness, and reduce poverty among vulnerable groups. However, the political constituencies to support such policies are weak, since the risks affect people most strongly at particular life stages and among specific groups. This paper examines attitudes to new social risk labour market policies in four contrasting European countries. It shows that attitudes in this area are strongly embedded in overall beliefs about the appropriate scale, direction and role of state welfare interventions, so that the weakness of new social risk constituencies does not necessarily undermine the possibility of attracting support for such policies, provided they are developed in ways that do not contradict national traditions of welfare state values.     

Australian employment services: Help or hindrance in the achievement of mutual obligation?

The concept of mutual obligation underpins Australian employment services. In return for receiving income support, there are three elements of mutual obligation: to actively seek work; to improve one’s competitiveness in the labour market; and to contribute to the community. Failing to undertake mutual obligation activities results in sanctions, usually unemployment benefit suspension or cancellation. In the year 2017/18, one mutual obligation activity, compulsory employment service provider appointments, accounted for more than 93 per cent of sanctions. The study reported here explores unemployed and recently employed workers’ experiences of appointments and their attitudes to the concept of mutual obligation. The findings are that unemployed workers say appointments have little utility for advancing elements of mutual obligation and are psychologically harmful. Non-attendance may be a form of self-protection although seeking a medical exemption or dropping out of the system altogether also appears to be a common self-protection strategy. We also find that non-attendance at appointments cannot be conflated with a negative attitude to mutual obligation and that unemployed workers want services that are effective and psychologically positive to help them to fulfil their mutual obligations.     

Chinese seniors’ attitudes towards government responsibility for social welfare: Self‐interest,collectivism orientation and regional disparities

Government responsibility for social welfare remains a significant issue in the field of social welfare. Public welfare attitudes not only refer to the social needs of members of society, but also are viewed as the basis for government responsibility for social welfare. Data used in this study came from the Moderate Universalist Social Welfare Survey with a final sample of 1,166 seniors from four Chinese cities in 2012. This study examined seniors’ attitudes towards government responsibility for providing specific welfare and mixed welfare. It concluded that seniors’ welfare attitudes share the traits of self‐interest in general. Seniors’ perception of social rights and cities of residence were two important factors associated with welfare attitudes in both aspects of specific and mixed welfare. The stronger seniors’ social rights perception was the more favourable were the attitudes they held towards government responsibility for social welfare, indicating the collectivism orientation of their welfare attitudes.     

Welfare and the unemployment crisis: Sweden in the 1990s

In the 1990s Sweden went through a deep economic recession accompanied by a massive increase in unemployment and a rapidly growing budget deficit. The crisis had large repercussions for the welfare of many citizens and it generated cutbacks in virtually all social policy programmes. This halted a welfare-state expansion that had been going on for decades. It also caused great concern about the state of welfare of the nation. In 1999 the Swedish Government appointed a 'Welfare Commission', a team of academic researchers who were assigned the task of drawing up a balance sheet for the development of welfare in the 1990s. The Commission delivered its final report in October 2001. This article is a condensed account of one of the more central issues for the Commission; namely, how the unemployment crisis affected already socially and economically vulnerable groups. Looking at the development over the entire decade, three groups stand out as particularly disadvantaged in terms of individual welfare resources: young adults, immigrants and single mothers. The downturn for these groups was especially accentuated in terms of employment and income. Young people and immigrants trying to get into the labour market during the crisis years faced the problems of newcomers to the systems of social protection. The poor economic development for single mothers could essentially be attributed to the shortage of work in general and of full-time work in particular that followed from the unemployment crisis. As a consequence, the importance of selective benefits increased and the relative size of all public transfers – despite rationing measures – stayed fairly unchanged. The results highlight the great influence of macroeconomic conditions and policy making for the welfare of vulnerable groups in society.     

城市弱势群体的社会支持网络——基于河北省保定市北市区的抽样调查研究

在保定市北市区弱势群体的抽样调查基础上,本文通过引入社会网络理论范式,对弱势群体的基本状况进行了具体的描述和深入分析,认为城市弱势群体社会支持网络存在着规模小、构成简单、同质性强、缺乏阶层内部整合等特征和问题,而引入社会工作专业支持,对培育和强化弱势群体社会支持网络至关重要。     

What about the fathers? The presence and absence of the father in social work practice in England,Ireland, Norway,and Sweden—A comparative study

Within Northern Europe, gendered roles and responsibilities within the family have been challenged through an emergence of different family forms, increasing cultural diversity, and progressive developments in welfare policies. To varying degrees, welfare policies in different countries support a dual‐earner model and encourage men to be more active as fathers by reinforcing statutory rights and responsibilities. In child welfare practice, there has traditionally been a strong emphasis on the mother as primary carer for the child; the father has been less visible. This paper explores, in four national welfare contexts, how child welfare social workers include fathers in practice decisions. Data were collected using focus group interviews with social workers from England, Ireland, Norway, and Sweden. Similarities and differences emerge in relation to services and the focus of social work assessments. However, overall, the research suggests that despite gains in policy and legislation that promote gender equality, fathers remain largely absent in child welfare practice decisions about the parenting of their children. From the research, we raise questions for social work practice and the development of welfare policies.     

Introduction to the special issue on welfare conditionality in Australia

Conditionality in Australia’s welfare state has sustained a significant academic critique, including the critique published in this journal. In this Special Issue of the Australian Journal of Social Issues, we contribute to the existing critical literature on welfare conditionality. This Special Issue aimed to provide empirical scrutiny into welfare reform and conditionality in Australia. The articles extend our understanding of welfare conditionality’s underpinnings and its lived effects. These case studies illuminate the aspects of welfare conditionality that have not received enough attention: the role of technology, the question of mobility, the relationship with housing and the little thought given to the state’s role in mutual obligation. What is clear is that the individualisation of structural problems is not just a theoretical and political misstep ripe for critique, but leads to the formulation of policies that impact marginalised people’s capacity to shape life on their own terms. Through different empirical foci, all papers in this Special Issue demonstrate how welfare conditionality is put forward as a solution to address the consequences of structural disadvantage.     

MYTHS OF WELFARE REFORM

In Australian welfare reform debate, a range of approaches and policies has been advocated. Regardless of their diversity, I argue that the debate has an unnecessarily narrow framework resulting from the widespread acceptance of at least three welfare reform myths. First, is the idea that the current system is anachronistic and in disrepair. Instead of this narrow focus on welfare policy, I argue that the welfare reform debate must be widened to include other domains of public policy to involve a ‘joined up’ approach to addressing poverty and disadvantage. The second myth is that welfare recipients need to be the focus of policy attention. Policy reforms focus on changing the behaviour of recipients and their communities. Because structural changes underlie increased benefit receipt, such reforms will only have minimal consequences. The third welfare reform myth is the false notion that the current welfare system lacks obligation.     

Facilitating Arts-Based Mindfulness Group Activities with Vulnerable Children: An Example of Nondeliberative Social Group Work Practice

ABSTRACT

This article discusses the process of facilitating arts-based mindfulness group work and activities with vulnerable children age 8 to 12 years who were involved with the child welfare or mental health systems. Specifically, it delineates connections between our group program and Norma Lang’s nondeliberative social group work practice. Importantly, in working with vulnerable children, the authors purposefully fostered the development of mutual aid, creativity, and strengths and recognized that each group had a life of its own.     

FALSE PRINCIPLES OF WELFARE REFORM

Welfare reform both in Australia and throughout the OECD invokes various moral principles. These are articulated in arguments about ‘consent’, on both a micro‐ and macro‐level, and the ‘mutual obligation’ that ostensibly arises from consent. There are also frankly ‘paternalistic’ arguments, whether weak or strong, to the effect that forcing people into work is good for them. A critical assessment demonstrates that none of these arguments can justify the kind of welfare reform which is currently mooted. The real aim of such reform seems instead to be simply that of ‘clearing the welfare rolls ’. This has worrying ethical consequences.     

Indigenous Policy and Mutual Obligation: Shared or Shifting Responsibility Agreements?

Shared Responsibility Agreements (SRAs) are a key instrument of the Federal Government's new arrangements for the administration of Indigenous affairs. SRAs, described by the Government as a form of ‘mutual obligation’, require Indigenous communities to commit to behavioural changes or other actions in order to access ‘discretionary’ government funding for infrastructure or services. There are significant political, moral and practical issues raised by SRAs. In this paper we contend that despite the language of mutuality, flexibility and choice that accompanies SRAs, the approach appears more aptly associated with ‘divide and conquer’ tactics and a subtle shifting of responsibility for problems from governments to Indigenous communities themselves. In this paper we explore the concepts of mutual obligation and reciprocity, the structural biases that favour the state and its agencies over Indigenous communities in the SRA negotiation process, and issues of citizenship entitlements and accountability that are raised. Finally, acknowledging that SRAs can be a means for Indigenous communities to access greatly needed funding, we suggest various strategies and measures that could be taken up to make the SRA framework more equitable and effective.     

The moral hazard of conditionality: Restoring the integrity of social security law

This article examines the extent to which the Australian and UK social security systems meet their legal obligations to provide basic relief to citizens in need. Conditionality and “mutual obligation” are at the core of both the UK and Australian social security systems and are based on the concept of moral hazard, the goal being to ensure that claimants do not consider living on benefits to be preferable to engaging in paid work. Yet, we argue that the element of “mutuality” is missing in both systems; welfare claimants are subject to myriad conditions and obligations, whilst the state operates free of any legal responsibility to provide even basic relief to those in need, to prevent or alleviate extreme poverty and destitution. We outline the extent to which Australian and UK social security laws require governments to relieve destitution, examining both domestic and human rights law. We conclude that legal protections are weak and that both systems fail to meet the basic conditions of humanity toward their citizens. On this basis, we argue that such failings demonstrate a lack of integrity which undermines the standing of both the UK and Australia to invoke a claim of moral hazard to defend claimant conditionality.