Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (9)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Stainton, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

British Journal of Social Work (2002) 32, 751-763
© 2002 British Association of Social Workers

Taking Rights Structurally: Disability, Rights and Social Worker Responses to Direct Payments

Tim Stainton

Tim Stainton, BSW, MSW, Ph.D. is an Associate Professor at the School of Social Work and Family Studies, University of British Columbia.

Correspondence to: Tim Stainton, School of Social Work and Family Studies, University of British Columbia, 2080 West Mall, Vancouver, BC, Canada, V6T 1Z2. E-mail: timst{at}interchange.ubc.ca

Summary

This article examines the link between a justice and rights discourse and disability policy and practice. Specifically, it considers social worker responses to direct payments, a policy which has been linked to a discourse of social justice and rights. The article initially considers the nature of justice and rights, arguing that these can plausibly be seen to be grounded in the idea of autonomy and that a rights or justice based social policy and practice must be grounded in the protection, enhancement and development of the capacity for autonomous action. The article then presents partial findings of a research project, which sampled social workers' views and attitudes towards direct payments in three local authorities. The findings suggest that social workers are aware of the link between direct payments and autonomy and are generally very supportive of the move to a rights based approach to policy and practice as evidenced by programmes such as direct payments. The paper also concludes that structural constraints limit social workers' ability to fully function from a rights based approach to disability.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Br J Soc WorkHome page
K. Ellis
Direct Payments and Social Work Practice: The Significance of 'Street-Level Bureaucracy' in Determining Eligibility
Br. J. Soc. Work, April 1, 2007; 37(3): 405 - 422.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Intellect DisabilHome page
S. Dowling, J. Manthorpe, and S. Cowley
Working on person-centred planning: From amber to green light?
J Intellect Disabil., March 1, 2007; 11(1): 65 - 82.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J Soc WorkHome page
D. Leece and J. Leece
Direct Payments: Creating a Two-Tiered System in Social Care?
Br. J. Soc. Work, December 1, 2006; 36(8): 1379 - 1393.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Critical Social PolicyHome page
J. Lyon
A systems approach to direct payments: a response to 'Friend or foe? Towards a critical assessment of direct payments'
Critical Social Policy, May 1, 2005; 25(2): 240 - 252.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Critical Social PolicyHome page
H. Spandler
Friend or Foe? Towards a Critical Assessment of Direct Payments
Critical Social Policy, May 1, 2004; 24(2): 187 - 209.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.