Add wos sample results library
This commit is contained in:
parent
6305e61d1f
commit
19e409ad85
2173 changed files with 235628 additions and 20 deletions
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
|
|||
abstract: 'This paper uses qualitative data from a cross-national study of `cash
|
||||
|
||||
for care'' schemes in five European countries (Austria, France, Italy,
|
||||
|
||||
The Netherlands and the United Kingdom) to consider the concepts of
|
||||
|
||||
empowerment and independence in relation to both care-users and
|
||||
|
||||
care-givers. The paper locates the schemes along two axes, one of
|
||||
|
||||
regulation/non-regulation, the other whether relatives can be paid or
|
||||
|
||||
not. Each of the schemes has a different impact both on the care
|
||||
|
||||
relationship and on the labour market for care. In The Netherlands where
|
||||
|
||||
relatives can be paid, for example, a fully commodified form of informal
|
||||
|
||||
care emerges; but in Austria and Italy with low regulation, a mix of
|
||||
|
||||
informal and formal care-givers/workers has emerged with many
|
||||
|
||||
international migrant workers. In the UK, direct payments allow
|
||||
|
||||
care-users to employ local care-workers who deliver care for various
|
||||
|
||||
lengths of time; while in France a credentialised system means that
|
||||
|
||||
care-work is delivered by qualified workers but for very short
|
||||
|
||||
intervals. The main conclusion is that none of these schemes have a
|
||||
|
||||
simple outcome or advantage, and that the contexts in which they occur
|
||||
|
||||
and the nature of their regulation has to be understood before drawing
|
||||
|
||||
conclusions about their impact on empowerment and independence on both
|
||||
|
||||
sides of the care relationship.'
|
||||
affiliation: 'Ungerson, C (Corresponding Author), Univ Southampton, Sch Social Sci,
|
||||
Southampton SO17 1BJ, Hants, England.
|
||||
|
||||
Univ Southampton, Sch Social Sci, Southampton SO17 1BJ, Hants, England.'
|
||||
author: Ungerson, C
|
||||
author-email: ceu@soton.ac.uk
|
||||
author_list:
|
||||
- family: Ungerson
|
||||
given: C
|
||||
da: '2023-09-28'
|
||||
doi: 10.1017/S0144686X03001508
|
||||
eissn: 1469-1779
|
||||
files: []
|
||||
issn: 0144-686X
|
||||
journal: AGEING \& SOCIETY
|
||||
keywords: 'care-users; care-givers; care-work; social care; direct payments; cash
|
||||
|
||||
for care; migrant labour; comparative social policy'
|
||||
language: English
|
||||
month: MAR
|
||||
number: '2'
|
||||
number-of-cited-references: '5'
|
||||
pages: 189-212
|
||||
papis_id: b1f3ce4b9a876dd00310ee64a0f8ced6
|
||||
ref: Ungerson2004whoseempowerment
|
||||
times-cited: '139'
|
||||
title: Whose empowerment and independence? A cross-national perspective on `cash for
|
||||
care' schemes
|
||||
type: Article
|
||||
unique-id: WOS:000220613400003
|
||||
usage-count-last-180-days: '0'
|
||||
usage-count-since-2013: '27'
|
||||
volume: '24'
|
||||
web-of-science-categories: Gerontology
|
||||
year: '2004'
|
||||
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue