The treatment of informal care related risks as social risks: an analysis of the English care policy system
Average rating
Cast your vote
You can rate an item by clicking the amount of stars they wish to award to this item.
When enough users have cast their vote on this item, the average rating will also be shown.
Star rating
Your vote was cast
Thank you for your feedback
Thank you for your feedback
Authors
Morgan, FionaIssue Date
2017-05-29
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
The social risk literature examines the extent to which states have provided social protection against the ‘old’ social risks of the post-war era and the ‘new’ social risks affecting post-industrial capitalist states. In this paper the contingency of the provision of informal care to people aged 65 and over is discussed. The paper deconstructs the concept of social risk to determine the characteristics and processes which contribute to states recognising specific contingencies as social risks which require social protection. This conceptualisation is applied to make the case that care related risks associated with the informal care of older people should be recognised and treated as social risks by states. Data from a qualitative study of the English care policy system provide empirical evidence that informal care related risks are recognised, but not treated, as social risks in England. The findings reveal informal carers and the older people they care for receive inadequate and inconsistent statutory protection against the poverty and welfare risks they face, furthermore the design and operationalisation of the English care policy system generates risks for care relationships.Citation
Morgan, F. (2017) 'The treatment of informal care related risks as social risks: an analysis of the English care policy system', Journal of Social Policy, 47 (1) pp. 179-196Publisher
Cambridge University PressJournal
Journal of Social PolicyType
Journal articleLanguage
enDescription
This is an accepted manuscript of an article published by Cambridge University Press in Journal of Social Policy on 29/05/2017, available online: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279417000265 The accepted version of the publication may differ from the final published version.ISSN
0047-2794ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1017/s0047279417000265
Scopus Count
Collections
The following licence applies to the copyright and re-use of this item:
- Creative Commons
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as https://creativecommons.org/CC BY-NC-ND 4.0