Debate: The wrong prescription: disabled people and welfare conditionality

Patrick, Ruth; Mead, Lawrence M.; Gregg, Paul; Seebohm, Patience

doi:10.1332/147084411x574572

Cited by 20 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A new era of conditionality towards the end of New Labour rule saw benefits become more reliant on 'citizens meeting certain conditions which are invariably behavioural' (DWP, 2008: 1). These reforms brought the biggest changes for lone parents and ill or disabled people, through reform of Income Support and the replacement of Incapacity Benefit with Employment Support Allowance -which have increasingly required Work Focussed Interviews and job seeking activities (Patrick, 2011). These efforts have been endorsed and intensified under the UK Coalition government (2010-present) with policy direction taking a more punitive and behavioural turn (Jones et al, 2013), particularly evident in the Welfare Reform Act 2012.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptualising the active welfare subject: welfare reform in discourse, policy and lived experience

Wright

2016

Policy &Amp; Politics

124

122

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The idea of the active welfare subject has become irresistible to both policy makers and academics and has taken a lead role in the transformation of twenty-first century social security systems. Two distinguishable approaches have emerged – the dominant model and a counter model. The dominant model emphasises moralised individual responsibility for ‘wrong choices’ and mandates behavioural change to become active. The counter model situates benefit recipients in the present as disempowered creative, reflexive and resourceful beings. This article develops conceptualisations by comparing benefit recipients’ accounts (from an exploratory qualitative study) of lived experience with both models.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptualising the active welfare subject: welfare reform in discourse, policy and lived experience

Wright

2016

Policy &Amp; Politics

124

122

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These notions are reinforced by Patrick's (2011a) research which suggests that the government's conditionality prescription for raising the employment rate of disabled people is likely to fail. Sanctions and increased conditionality are unlikely to provide a remedy, particularly when the problem is with the disabling structures and practices of society, rather than any individual deficits with sick and disabled people themselves.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

‘The unwilling and the unwell’? Exploring stakeholders’ perceptions of working with long term sickness benefits recipients

Garthwaite

Bambra

Warren

2013

Disability & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Use policyThe full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. AbstractThis paper draws on qualitative research with Incapacity Benefit (IB) stakeholders in the North East of England, UK. Stakeholders' experiences of working with long-term sickness benefits recipients reveal multiple barriers that both sick and disabled people, and themselves as practitioners, clearly face. Reflections on what ongoing welfare reform could mean for future practice for both stakeholders and recipients will be explored. The findings suggests that whilst stakeholders recognise the complex barriers faced by those receiving sickness benefits, a wider moral dialogue between 'deserving' and 'undeserving' is being created and sustained as a result of negative stereotyping of sickness benefits recipients.

show abstract

“…Those analyses that emphasise the nature of challenges that nation states face as an explanation for developments in policy are essentially liberal in character and define the state and its agencies as essentially benign and working towards (albeit undefined or hazily defined) concepts of the social 'good'. However, as has been pointed out in the case of Australia (for example, Galvin 2004;Humpage 2007;Soladatic and Pini 2012) and the UK (Roulstone 2000;Piggott and Grover 2009;Grover and Piggott 2010;Patrick 2011aPatrick , 2011b what is often described in positive termsÁas, for example, 'enabling' and 'inclusionary' for disabled people in our caseÁis often wrapped in authoritarian discourses, and has detrimental impacts upon the material well-being of disabled people and is felt as exclusionary (see, for example, Campbell et al 2011 (Spartacus Report);Briant, Watson, and Philo 2011;Soldatic and Meekosha forthcoming;Morris 2006). In other words, there is little that is benign about such developments.…”

Section: Explaining Change To Social Security Regimes For Disabled Pementioning

confidence: 90%

“…290). While people in the WRAG cannot be mandated to apply for or take a particular job, it is clear that the ESA is part of a trend towards defining disabled people as being capable of working at some point in the future on the threat of benefit sanctions (Patrick 2011a(Patrick , 2011b.…”

Section: Income Replacement Benefits and Disabled People In The Ukmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neoliberal restructuring, disabled people and social (in)security in Australia and Britain

Grover

Soldatić

2013

Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines recent social security policies in Australia and the UK for workless disabled people. The paper outlines developments in both countries over the past two decades and points to the fact that while there may be differences in the detail, the trends in such policies in the two countries are similar. This involves moves towards stricter eligibility criteria, greater expectation of workless disabled people to make efforts to (re)enter paid employment and, through such processes, a redrawing of the 'disability category' that denotes the 'truly' disabled from those who are deemed capable of doing at least some paid work. The paper goes on to consider explanations of such change, arguing that liberal explanations in the social administration tradition are problematic and that they, therefore, need to be placed within the neoliberal project, in particular its concern with putting people to work. The paper concludes that this has essentially involved a redrawing of the disability category to ensure a smaller number of people of working age in both countries can legitimately claim an existence outside of paid work. The paper also argues that more comparative research is required to understand the impacts of such trends on disabled people and provide insights for those resisting the influence of neoliberalism on welfare regimes.

show abstract

Debate: The wrong prescription: disabled people and welfare conditionality

Cited by 20 publications

References 0 publications

Conceptualising the active welfare subject: welfare reform in discourse, policy and lived experience

Conceptualising the active welfare subject: welfare reform in discourse, policy and lived experience

‘The unwilling and the unwell’? Exploring stakeholders’ perceptions of working with long term sickness benefits recipients

Neoliberal restructuring, disabled people and social (in)security in Australia and Britain

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About