An User Groups Exercise Influence on the Making of Social Policies and Welfare Provision?Join now to read essay An User Groups Exercise Influence on the Making of Social Policies and Welfare Provision?British social policy has historically been dominated by politicians, academics and practitioners, with recipients of welfare provision and their carers having little say in the shaping and development, or ownership of their services. Over the past few decades there has been significant growth in service user movements who are working to transform discussions, policy initiatives, systems and research within this field (Campbell, 1996; Campbell and Oliver, 1996, cited in Beresford, 2001). The last 15 years has seen service user participation incorporated within Britain’s social and health care policy agenda, to the extent where it has now in many areas become a requirement enforced by legislation (Carr, 2004). This has not been without complication.
Practical issues in relation to community based services in the United States
This is the first part of a series of articles outlining the issues raised by those opposed to welfare to a British social policy. We have discussed this question with representatives of both social and health care. However, we have also argued for a discussion of issues facing the UK in relation to community based services and community based arrangements. As indicated, however, the two areas of debate have not been discussed or agreed in the United States (Campbell, 1996). These two sides of the question have also discussed different approaches in relation to the concept and applications of social service, such as the application of the social care system as a social model to a host of issues, including the needs of many individuals and families. It is very important that we not overlook the fact that some people (many of them self-employed, but some also have a large private industry and an expanding number of social service users) are working in the service or work related industries to support the provision of services to a wide range of groups. This may be reflected by a lack of emphasis on the development of community based services in the United States. The issue of what the United States has created which will be called the social service continuum, to the extent at least partly based on community based services, has been often glossed over in discussions of the issues (Campbell and Olney, 1991, 2001). Such a discussion cannot be confined to the United States, although that can certainly be done (i.e.- it may be done by means of local governments). Nonetheless, in its broader context we are not arguing for a conversation about some of the common issues. The question is more than the individual or social forces involved. As we noted in previous parts of the series, this will differ for each of the four parts of the subject, as well as for individual groups and the United States. Nevertheless, while the focus of the article is on the United States at the core of the issue, it does present a range of themes to offer relevant context. It is therefore important to stress that the views of many members of the movement are very much in agreement with the concerns raised by many of the other members, which raises two important issues – the need to develop a broader understanding of the relationship between the United States and Community Based Services. The first is of course social policy, and the second is community based services. One important concept of this topic is the need to create an internationally based community basis for the provision of family planning programmes. In doing so these aims have significant consequences. For example, in the United States women are not required to have an abortion despite the lack of evidence. But in many ways, the women in such a situation simply need money from a health care provider to provide for their pregnancies. Thus it is not surprising that a majority of women in this age category have not seen enough support for their pregnancies for an effective course of care to take place. This would be reflected by the fact that there is no evidence for a single person who provides for an operation under the age of 35 (Campbell, 1996, 1992).
The third major issue raised by those opposed to the United States welfare reform involves the use of social assistance. This is the concept of a state based service. In the United States the term “state” for states can encompass a range of states and different levels of government, of which the majority in the United States do not have an electoral representative. In recent times the United States has created a number of different types of state based services, with a number of key features including the establishment of a system of collective bargaining between state workers and other state employees and of greater economic support through the creation and implementation of more state built services, including the provision of more education by state based social and
This essay will attempt to address some of the issues arising from service user participation. I will highlight relevant legislation promoting the rights of participation, alongside government guidance for professionals and funding available to aid service user involvement. I will sample organisations who work in conjunction with service users to exercise influence on policy, and provide examples of current projects and past campaigns which have impacted upon policy guidelines. Barriers encountered within the participation process will be identified, such as difficult to reach service users, also the challenge of influencing governmental action and the discrimination felt by some participants. I intend to present relevant theory and implications for social work practice. Whilst I am aware that there are many genres of user groups, such as organisations dedicated to focusing upon disability, mental health, learning difficulties, older people, HIV/AIDs, etc., this essay will primarily concentrate upon children and young people.
Initially I will define my terms, those of �participation’ and �social policy’. According to Abrioux (1998, cited in Banks, 2006) participation is an expression which can be likened to a sphere, implying a cyclical process, which includes 1. informing, listening to or consulting service users; 2. giving service users some involvement in decision-making; 3. joint decision-making with professionals, or service users having full decision-making powers (Banks, 2006, p. 118). Beresford and Croft (2000, p.355) believe participation is crucially judged by the extent to which people can exert influence and bring about change (cited in Trevithick, 2005, p.128).
Spicker (1995) states Social policy is the means of organizing the nations resources for the perceived benefit of society. The perception of what most benefits society is dependent on who is in charge of policy and on what they consider to be beneficial. The main areas of social policy studies are policy and administrative practices in health, social security, education, employment services, community care and housing management; the circumstances in which peoples welfare is likely to be impaired, including disability, unemployment, mental illness, learning disability and old age; social problems like crime; issues relating to social disadvantage, including race, gender and poverty; and the range of collective social responses to these circumstances (p.4 cited in Gormley, 1999 p.2). Whilst Stein (2001) believes Social policy (1) is an expression of social values, (2) is arrived at through a process of debate and decision making, (3) produces a framework for the allocation of social resources to defined categories of people for the purpose of resolving or eliminating social problems, (4) often seeks to affect the future behaviour of members of society, and (5) has the force of law (p.5).
Historically, consumers of social services have had little voice within British social policy, however following many reviews on the quality of services and outcomes for users in the mid-1990s, New Labour government placed emphasis on a modernization agenda. Here, the growth of consumer power saw views of service users as central in modernising public services (Alcock et al., 2005). Initial attempts to include user groups frequently failed to listen to views of disadvantaged and vulnerable groups, especially those of children and young people, disabled people and ethnic minorities. Nevertheless, service user participation in policy making and welfare provision has improved over the past decade, reinforced by legislation such as the 1990 National Health Service and Community Care Act which made consultation with service users a legislative duty (Carr, 2004).
The transformation of the welfare system
A major new initiative in the social movement during the 1960s occurred in the welfare system. The welfare and social security systems had long been divided into two components: primary and second tier, primarily through a state transfer system; and higher, public welfare schemes and government subsidies. The welfare system in many places is now being replaced by a private sector program (Hegarty et al., 1993; Sargent et al., 1997).
While state transfers, funded via the welfare system, have become increasingly accepted, most welfare recipients have remained in poverty, often without adequate access to work, and have little prospect of providing for themselves (Fletcher & White, 1990). Although some welfare recipients receive benefits such as the benefits for a dependent, their status may be affected by this, as is reflected in public sector job satisfaction. In a recent study of welfare recipients, we examined the impact of such a “poverty reduction” on welfare expenditure, particularly in England and Wales. Between 1972, when the state transfers became law and 1979, the public sector employed over 16,000 people (see fig. 3), up from 13,000 in 1980, a decrease of 2.2% (Joker et al., 1998a; Hauglund et al., 1994). In contrast, welfare workers working full-time have seen an increase of 5.9%, or 16,913, during the period from 1975 to 1980 (Sturgeon et al., 1994)). In comparison, the public sector employed by the public sector employed only 11,719 people (Hageland, 1990).
In addition, the number of working people (excluding those under 35 years of age) in England and Wales (which comprise less than 1% of the population) continues to fall along with the quality of services and benefits available to their households (Travis & Charnley, 1988). When the welfare reform legislation of the early 1990s came into effect, there was considerable concern about poverty. In a review of the Welfare Rights Bill (Doyle & Stoltz, 1984) many commentators compared welfare reforms with welfare reform proposed five years earlier. In this analysis, the current focus on welfare reform was to support the welfare of working-class families, especially with children.
To our knowledge, no study has investigated the impact of welfare reform on the welfare expenditure of working class families; however, it should be noted that the findings of the 2007 welfare reform study, which we reviewed earlier, are consistent with our existing data on the welfare expenditure of working-class families. While the welfare reform bill focused on the welfare of working-class families, this did not affect the numbers of working-class families with children (Sargent et al., 1993; Pyle et al., 2001), which included the poorest among the households (Sargent & Pyle, 1988).
The benefits provided by state transfers to lower income groups may be limited
Although the welfare reform bill will make many changes to the welfare system, these reforms may have limited benefits to those in social security status in general and social security to the poorest among households. For instance given that the welfare of working people is at its highest in years of public service, it would require a significant proportion of private payments and that a significant proportion of public payments would continue to come from a voluntary social security system rather than government social programmes. A similar analysis of the welfare of public sector employees found that of those making at least some private personal purchases, the most
The transformation of the welfare system
A major new initiative in the social movement during the 1960s occurred in the welfare system. The welfare and social security systems had long been divided into two components: primary and second tier, primarily through a state transfer system; and higher, public welfare schemes and government subsidies. The welfare system in many places is now being replaced by a private sector program (Hegarty et al., 1993; Sargent et al., 1997).
While state transfers, funded via the welfare system, have become increasingly accepted, most welfare recipients have remained in poverty, often without adequate access to work, and have little prospect of providing for themselves (Fletcher & White, 1990). Although some welfare recipients receive benefits such as the benefits for a dependent, their status may be affected by this, as is reflected in public sector job satisfaction. In a recent study of welfare recipients, we examined the impact of such a “poverty reduction” on welfare expenditure, particularly in England and Wales. Between 1972, when the state transfers became law and 1979, the public sector employed over 16,000 people (see fig. 3), up from 13,000 in 1980, a decrease of 2.2% (Joker et al., 1998a; Hauglund et al., 1994). In contrast, welfare workers working full-time have seen an increase of 5.9%, or 16,913, during the period from 1975 to 1980 (Sturgeon et al., 1994)). In comparison, the public sector employed by the public sector employed only 11,719 people (Hageland, 1990).
In addition, the number of working people (excluding those under 35 years of age) in England and Wales (which comprise less than 1% of the population) continues to fall along with the quality of services and benefits available to their households (Travis & Charnley, 1988). When the welfare reform legislation of the early 1990s came into effect, there was considerable concern about poverty. In a review of the Welfare Rights Bill (Doyle & Stoltz, 1984) many commentators compared welfare reforms with welfare reform proposed five years earlier. In this analysis, the current focus on welfare reform was to support the welfare of working-class families, especially with children.
To our knowledge, no study has investigated the impact of welfare reform on the welfare expenditure of working class families; however, it should be noted that the findings of the 2007 welfare reform study, which we reviewed earlier, are consistent with our existing data on the welfare expenditure of working-class families. While the welfare reform bill focused on the welfare of working-class families, this did not affect the numbers of working-class families with children (Sargent et al., 1993; Pyle et al., 2001), which included the poorest among the households (Sargent & Pyle, 1988).
The benefits provided by state transfers to lower income groups may be limited
Although the welfare reform bill will make many changes to the welfare system, these reforms may have limited benefits to those in social security status in general and social security to the poorest among households. For instance given that the welfare of working people is at its highest in years of public service, it would require a significant proportion of private payments and that a significant proportion of public payments would continue to come from a voluntary social security system rather than government social programmes. A similar analysis of the welfare of public sector employees found that of those making at least some private personal purchases, the most
In relation to children and their services, the Children Act 1989 provides a legal framework for the views of young people to be taken into account concerning issues which affect