Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xm8r8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-22T09:16:01.514Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Politics of Entitlement and Personalisation: Perspectives on a Proposed National Disability Long-term Care and Support Scheme in Australia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2012

Michele Foster ,
Paul Henman ,
Jennifer Fleming ,
Cheryl Tilse  and
Rosamund Harrington
Michele Foster
Affiliation:
School of Social Work and Human Services, The University of Queensland E-Mail: m.foster@social.uq.edu.au
Paul Henman
Affiliation:
School of Social Work and Human Services, The University of Queensland E-Mail: p.henman@uq.edu.au
Jennifer Fleming
Affiliation:
School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland E-Mail: j.flemming@shrs.uq.edu.au
Cheryl Tilse
Affiliation:
School of Social Work and Human Services, The University of Queensland E-Mail: c.tilse@social.uq.edu.au
Rosamund Harrington
Affiliation:
School of Social Work and Human Services, The University of Queensland E-Mail: ros.harrington@uq.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Internationally, over the past two decades the theme of personalisation has driven significant reforms within health and social care services. In the Australian context, the principles of ‘entitlement based on need’ and ‘personalisation’ frame the proposed National Disability Long-Term Care and Support Scheme (LTCSS). In this article, we critically examine the interpretations and ambiguities of need and personalisation. We consider the administrative complexities of applying these principles in practice and the uncertainties about the roles of state and the market, and use individual case examples to illustrate areas of potential tension. Whether principles translate to deliver personalised services and avoid harmful trade-offs between access, equity and choice is the true test of social policy.

Keywords

Personalised caredisabled adultschoicedisability insurance scheme
Type
Articles
Information
Social Policy and Society , Volume 11 , Issue 3 , July 2012 , pp. 331 - 343
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) (2008) Australia's Health 2008, Cat. no. AUS 99, Canberra: AIHW.Google Scholar
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) (2009a) Disability Support Services 2007–08: National Data on Services Provided under the Commonwealth State/Territory Disability Agreement, Disability series, Cat. no. DIS 56, Canberra: AIHW.Google Scholar
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) (2009b) Disability in Australia: Multiple Disabilities and Need for Assistance, Disability series, Cat. no. DIS 55, Canberra: AIHW.Google Scholar
Blyth, C. and Gardner, A. (2007) ‘We're not asking for anything special: direct payments and the carers of disabled children’, Disability and Society, 22, 3, 235–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonyhady, B. P. and Sykes, H. (2008) ‘Disability reform: from crisis welfare to a planned insurance model’, article submitted to the Australia 2020 Summit, Canberra, 19–20 April.Google Scholar
Chenoweth, L. and Clements, N. (2009) Funding and Service Options for People with Disabilities: Final Report, Brisbane: Griffith University.Google Scholar
Dean, H. (2010) Understanding Human Need, Bristol: The Polity Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaHSCIA) (2010) Inquiry into a National Disability Long-term Care and Support Scheme, Canberra: FaHSCIA, www.fahcsia.gov.au/sa/disability/progserv/govtint/Pages/feasibility_study.aspx [accessed 16.04.2010].Google Scholar
Disability Investment Group (DIG) (2009) The Way Forward: A New Disability Policy Framework for Australia, Report of the Disability Investment Group, Canberra: FaHCSIA.Google Scholar
Duckett, S. (2007) The Australian Health Care System, Melbourne: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Duffy, S. (2010) ‘The citizenship theory of social justice: exploring the meaning of personalisation for social workers’, Journal of Social Work Practice, 24, 3, 253–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duffy, S., Waters, J. and Glasby, J. (2010) ‘Personalisation and adult social care: future options for the reform of public services’, Policy and Politics, 38, 4, 493–508.Google Scholar
Ferguson, I. (2007) ‘Increasing user choice or privatizing risk? The antinomies of personalization’, British Journal of Social Work, 37, 3, 387–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, K., Gleeson, R., Edwards, R., Purcal, C., Sitek, T., Dinning, B., Laragy, C., D'Aegher, L. and Thompson, D. (2010) Effectiveness of Individual Funding Approaches for Disability Support, Report to the Australian Government Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs, Canberra: FaHCSIA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foster, M., Harris, J., Jackson, K., Morgan, H. and Glendinning, C. (2006) ‘Personalised social care for adults with disabilities: a problematic concept for frontline practice’, Health and Social Care in the Community, 14, 2, 125–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Glasby, J., Le Grand, J. and Duffy, S. (2009) ‘A healthy choice? Direct payments and healthcare in the English NHS’, Policy and Politics, 37, 4, 481–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glendinning, C., Halliwell, S., Jacobs, S., Rummery, K. and Tyler, J. (2000) ‘New kinds of care, new kinds of relationships: how purchasing affects relationships in giving and receiving personal assistance’, Health and Social Care in the Community, 8, 3, 201–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Glendinning, C., Hudson, B. and Means, R. (2005) ‘Under strain? Exploring the troubled relationship between health and social care’, Public Money and Management, 25, 4, 245–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gough, I. and Thomas, T. (1994) ‘Why do levels of human welfare vary among nations?’, International Journal of Health Services, 24, 4, 715–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greener, I. (2008) ‘Markets in the public sector: when do they work, and what do we do when they don't?’, Policy and Politics, 36, 1, 93–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, V. (2006) ‘The empowerment agenda: civil society and markets in disability and mental health’, Institute of Public Affairs, 18, 1, 3–20.Google Scholar
Jones, K. and Nettan, A. (2010) ‘The costs of change: a case study of the process of implementing individual budgets across pilot local authorities in England’, Health and Social Care in The Community, 18, 1, 51–8.Google Scholar
Kemshall, H. (2010) ‘Risk rationalities in contemporary social work policy and practice’, British Journal of Social Work, 40, 4, 1247–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kortte, K., Gilbert, M., Gorman, P. and Wegener, S. (2010) ‘Positive psychological variables in the prediction of life satisfaction after spinal cord injury’, Rehabilitation Psychology, 55, 1, 40–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leadbeater, D. (2004) Personalisation through Participation, London: Demos.Google Scholar
Martin Ginis, K. A., Jetha, A., Mack, D. E. and Hetz, S. (2010) ‘Physical activity and subjective well-being among people with spinal cord injury: a meta-analysis’, Spinal Cord, 48, 65–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) (2009) The Plan for a National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), Canberra: NDIS, www.ndis.org.au [accessed 03.2010].Google Scholar
Needham, C. (2010) ‘Personalization: from story-line to practice’, Social Policy and Administration, 45, 1, 54–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Productivity Commission (2011) Disability Care and Support, Draft Inquiry Report, Vol. 1, Canberra: Productivity Commission.Google Scholar
Sapey, B. and Pearson, J. (2004) ‘Do disabled people need social workers?’, Social Work and Social Services Review, 11, 3, 52–70.Google Scholar
Scourfield, P. (2007) ‘Social care and the modern citizen: client, consumer, service user, manager and entrepreneur’, British Journal of Social Work, 37, 1, 107–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Senate Standing Committee on Community Affairs (2007) Funding and Operation of the Commonwealth State/Territory Disability Agreement, Canberra: Senate Printing Unit.Google Scholar
Sevenhuijsen, S. (2000) ‘Caring in the third way: the relation between obligation, responsibility and care in Third Way discourse’, Critical Social Policy, 20, 1, 5–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shorten, B. (2009) ‘Right to an ordinary life’, address to the National Press Club, Canberra, 1 April.Google Scholar
Social Enterprise Partnership (SEP) (2010) Lifelong Disability Entitlement Scheme: Transformational Change in Disability Funding, Burwood, Victoria: Social Enterprise Partnerships, www.partnerships.org.au/LDESflier.htm [accessed 05.2010].Google Scholar
Sowerby, D. (2010) ‘What sort of helping relationships are needed to make personalisation happen and how can organisations be developed to support this?’, Journal of Social Work Practice, 24, 3, 269–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ungerson, C. (2000) ‘Thinking about the production and consumption of long-term care in Britain: does gender still matter?’, Journal of Social Policy, 29, 4, 623–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wetherly, P. (1996) ‘Basic needs and social policy’, Critical Social Policy, 16, 46, 45–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yeatman, A. (2009) ‘The individual at the centre of subjective experience and the right to self-preservation’, in Yeatman, A., Dowsett, G., Fine, M. and Gursansky, D. (eds.), Individualization and the Delivery of Welfare Services, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 42–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar