Personalisation,individualism and the politics of disablement

This paper assesses the social policy narrative personalisation, and particularly the implications of the narrative for disability politics. The advantages and disadvantages of positioning specific funding mechanisms within the narrative are explored. It is argued that personalisation is insufficiently aligned with collective aspects of empowerment. More particularly, it disproportionately emphasises improvements in individual autonomy through personalised support, and lacks reference to structural oppression or the need for collective forms of action that bring about structural change. It is further argued that personalisation lack a multi-faceted analysis of disability and disempowerment, and as a result also lacks any vision of a positive alternative society. In assessing personalisation, the positive and negative dimensions of disabled people’s freedom are considered. As a response to the apparent shortcomings of personalisation, the integrated living approach and Centres for Independent Living are considered important elements in an alternative narrative to personalisation.     

Do self‐assessment and self‐directed support undermine traditional social work with disabled people?

In recent years, self‐assessment and self‐directed support have become mainstream options within disability services. The Disabled People’s Movement has advocated the need for such change for a long time but this has been persistently resisted by many social workers. In this article, it will be argued that both self‐assessment and self‐directed support undermine traditional social work and that social workers need to begin to work alongside disabled people, rather than ‘for’ disabled people, in order to achieve substantial system change.     

Cash payments in context: (self-)regulation in the new social relations of assistance

Cash payments to meet social care needs offer the possibility for the direct employment of personal assistants using public funds. Empirical work internationally has identified the benefits of cash payments. However, there has been less interest in the relationships between employers and their employees. This article offers some reflections upon the employment relationship from the perspectives of employers who have learning difficulties and their personal assistants. The study involved eight employers, their supporters and their personal assistants in an English city. A grounded theory approach was utilised and interviews were analysed using a framework approach. This article argues that the relational aspects of direct employment arrangements have not been adequately considered in academic literature and the policy framework. These insights can add to debates around how social care support mechanisms can offer responsive assistance whilst questioning the assumed ‘empowering’ effect of an unregulated market.     

Building on the original strengths of direct payments to create a better future for social care

Confidence in the prevailing In Control model of personal budgets in the United Kingdom is beginning to waver. This raises the question of ‘where to next?’ for social care. Will we be returning to the monolithic system that typified services at the turn of the millennium – a system that is deeply oppressive for the great majority who lack the support and confidence to escape it by accessing a direct payment to manage their own support system? The Care Act has made no change to the basic process whereby it is councils that will decide what a person’s needs are, which will be met and with what resource. However, we argue here that the situation is far from hopeless. In Control’s analysis, while attractive to a neo-liberal political ideology, was based on a serious failure to understand the reasons for the success of direct payments. Whilst policy-makers saw it as a triumph for consumerist notions of choice, it is better understood as a triumph for needs-based planning, but carried out in a person-centred way. Learning the right lessons offers a new way forward to deliver a respectful and flexible service within the context of the Care Act.     

Personalisation,social justice and social work: a reply to Simon Duffy

This paper begins by defining what is meant by adolescence and reviewing the literature which indicates concern for the high rates of suicidal behaviour in adolescence. Possible explanations as to why adolescents harm themselves are considered, as is the contagious aspect of some suicidal behaviours. Extracts from three interviews conducted with young women in residential care who have engaged in self-harming behaviours are then considered. Links are made between what they say and relevant theory. The paper goes on to discuss the impact of suicidal behaviour in residential care settings. It concludes that it is essential to create time and space to think carefully about this complex and multi-faceted difficulty both for the adolescents themselves and those in the caring professions charged with the responsibility of trying to help them.     

Can personal budgets really deliver better outcome for all at no cost? Reviewing the evidence,costs and quality

Political recognition of the parlous state of English social care and the urgent need for radical reform led to calls for new policy approaches that address the two key problems it faced: inadequate funding and poor quality and inappropriate provision. The New Labour government was convinced that it had found a way of dealing with these two competing problems and it embarked on a policy, which has subsequently gained cross-party support. The centre-piece was the concept of a personal budget, and was introduced with a belief that there would be major cost savings while improving service user satisfaction. This article will critically explore the evidence for whether the strategy is fulfilling that promise.     

Discretionary approaches to social workers’ personalisation of activation services for long-term welfare recipients

Contemporary social policies emphasise labour market inclusion of vulnerable groups through personalisation of activation services. This article investigates social workers’ decision-making when personalising activation measures to suit each client. Data consist of case files for 16 clients participating in a Norwegian activation scheme, and interviews with the clients’ designated social workers. Using Bakhtin’s theory of dialogism, the article examines what the social workers consider in their decision-making process and the pivotal factors in their conclusions. Findings show that social workers employ two distinct approaches to personalisation, which have significantly different implications for clients’ pathways towards labour market inclusion. The first approach concentrates on clients’ personal challenges, while the second focuses on feasible short-term employment strategies. The study demonstrates how institutional and political frameworks may lead to social workers’ posing activation requirements inconsistent with clients’ needs and capabilities. It suggests further research into these interrelations to improve social workers’ ability to adapt services to individual clients.     

Implementation of customisation strategies in collaborative networks through an innovative Reference Framework

Consumer needs and expectations of specific target groups – such as elderly, obese, disabled or diabetic persons – are arising as challenging opportunities for European companies which are asked to supply innovative customised goods of high quality at affordable price. This is particularly true in the fashion as well as in the orthopaedic sector where there are many different competences to conjugate to offer dedicated products to the mentioned target groups. This paper aims at proposing a reference model to support companies in defining collaborative supply networks for customised production. In particular, this work describes the implementation of the developed model in a real case highlighting the changes implied at network level to address the need for fashionable and healthy products.     

In celebration of the closure of the Independent Living Fund

Over the last months we have heard calls to save the Independent Living Fund (ILF). Social media and Internet forums were flooded with emotional pleas to the government beyond its final days: parent carers and vocal disabled people calling for action to prevent themselves or loved ones being ‘imprisoned’ in their home, unable to use the toilet or having a life not worth living. ‘I will have no control, no choice and be unable to live in the community’, one person chanted. Others chanted ‘which side are you on’ (Channel 4 News). I found myself in a very unusual situation. Here I was, a campaigner for independent living all my adult life, a former Direct Payment Support Service Manager, social work lecturer and ILF recipient. Surely I would be devastated that the ILF had ended? My experience was entirely different, I celebrated.     

Embarking on self-directed support in Scotland: a focused scoping review of the literature

This article presents findings from a focused scoping review of the published literature on self-directed support (SDS), the term adopted by the Scottish Government to refer to its policy to improve social care outcomes and choices for people using publicly funded services and to distinguish it from personalisation, the term more commonly used in England, and from consumer-directed-care and cash for counselling. The review was undertaken to inform an evaluation of the early adopters of SDS, funded by the Scottish Government 2009–2011, and was updated with later literature. It focused on the evidence base available to inform the Test Sites' (pilot local authorities) efforts to reduce bureaucracy or ‘red tape’ for people choosing their own social care and support; the available evidence about leadership and training to support these changes and about the use of specific transitional funding to ease the process of implementation. The findings of the literature review around these three themes are presented and discussed. The article concludes with a discussion of the potential for such focused literature reviews to inform policy-makers, researchers, and social work practitioners across Europe of the options available when seeking to combine rapid yet rigorous approaches to evidence.