Abstract

With successive English governments extolling the virtues of greater choice and control within welfare services, there is growing debate about concepts such as direct payments and personal budgets (in the UK and in many developed countries). With the evidence base inevitably patchy and incomplete, there have been increasing criticisms of these approaches from the social care trade press and from academic policy commentators alike. Against this background, this paper reviews the concerns that are emerging and explores some of the limitations of current debates—many of which make an implicit appeal to ‘the evidence’ in order to justify increasingly polarised views. In particular, the paper argues that many current accounts are based on an imperfect understanding of the principles at stake; on a failure to apply the same burden of proof to the old system as well as the new; on prior attitudes to state services and to current social care; and on a potentially limited adherence to more traditional forms of evidencebased practice.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.