Suchergebnisse

AbstractSocial care policy for older people in England continues to generate extensive discussion around the need to break with the past and to deliver a personalized response to need. This article explores the extent to which this represents a complete break with the past by looking at four key reports from the past, namely the Rucker Report (1946) on the break up of the Poor Law, the Seebohm Report (1968) on the personal social services, the Griffiths Report (1988) on community care and The Royal Commission on Long Term Care (Sutherland Report, 1999). Each is interrogated in terms of how social care is defined, how services are to be delivered, how quality is understood and the assumptions made about who will be able to access services. This analysis is used to draw out key continuities in policy assumptions such as the primacy of family and the ongoing debate about 'What is social care?' and how it can be distinguished from health care. The article also argues that the voluntary sector has always been seen as a 'key player' in social care. Finally, the analysis of the four reports is used to trace the ever changing role of local authorities in the planning, purchase and provision of social care services for older people.

Abstract The UK is very similar to many other European, North American and Australasian countries in its emphasis on 'ageing in place'. This article does not seek to challenge the importance of this for most older people but rather draws out the challenges and issues raised by older people who are vulnerable or in vulnerable housing situations. This is illustrated through drawing upon three separate studies which are on older homelessness, older people in the private rented sector and owner‐occupiers with dementia.

This article begins by looking at past policy assumptions about the importance of home and independence to older people. It is shown that it has long been argued that older people should stay in their own homes as long as possible but that this was not backed up with domiciliary services because of concerns that this would enable families to push caring responsibilities onto the state. The second half of the article looks at present day assumptions on this issue as addressed by the 1990 National Health Service and Community Care Act and compares this to what older people themselves have to say. By drawing on research on 39 older households the importance of home as a place of privacy and self identity is illustrated as is the rich and varied lives of these respondents both inside and outside their homes. It is argued that local authorities as the lead agencies in community care should help to foster such independence and that this requires them to develop a broad vision of community care which covers issues such as transport, leisure and household maintenance.