The ideological position of this thesis is located within the traditional family care model, where the family members are able to uphold their values and belief systems and capable to exercise choice and control over their functional activities of daily living. In this context, family refers to both blood relatives and to non-related significant family friends or neighbours. Even without this extended definition, the term family contains a bewildering diversity of the meaning. These relatives may have no common purpose or views in relation to the older relative’s best interest, yet they try to come together in times of family difficulties to support one another in order to avert family breakdown (Ugwumadu 2011). Nevertheless, the experience and views of some family members are often not sought for and therefore unknown or they are ignored by the professionals or decision makers. This behaviourial attitude or professional limitations tend to deprive some family members the opportunity to partake in decision making about their older relative’s long-term care needs and their wider family.
This article thus, aims to advance on the limitations and gaps on political ideologies, and current legislation such as the NHS and Community Care Act (1990) and Carers and Disabled Children Act (2000). Upholding family norms would have a deliberate strategy to preserve core family values; tradition, culture and purpose, at the same time stimulate, encourage progress, and change within the wider welfare service. The family is a social structure; their values apparently provide a compact incentive to respect the co-operative strength of culturally accepted decision-making process. Yet, inconsistent political ideologies and limitations within legislation and policies, has contributed to dependency culture amongst the users of public services. Family values and norms are unique and transferable between cultural settings and it could be argued that there is no similar motivational coherence in the complex of cultures and disparate family structures, which must be served by the state.
The characteristics of the family directed support care systems include: early intervention; targeted support where families understand the aims of services to enhance wellbeing; support which uses and builds on strengths which tackles the main problems and vulnerabilities; and a whole family approach, which considers how services and plans should fit together rather than considering problems in isolation. Family care system could usefully be engaged to the early consideration of care and applied to strategic recovering plans, which emerge from the family interactions and shared initiatives. The care model would assist in the reconnection and reconstruction of care needs assessment and safety parameters with support plans, in which the family members can understand, and produce by themselves. They would when appropriate source external help to bridge gaps within the family care systems and to support them in their caring role.
The ideology is to promote active partnership – a three dimensional approach – the family, the older relative and the state. Partnership in this context implies a measure of quality and agreed decision sharing between the stakeholders on how best to plan and manages the growing older people’s population and their care needs. However, in practice, in almost all the adult social care services for example, older people service – assessment and care planning which sometimes involve professionals, family members and service users, there are usually both stark and subtle differences in authority, responsibility and influence between them. Thus, difference of opinion could lead to waiting list for assessment and care, complaints against social services and poor quality of care that, if not resolved might lead to abusive situation in the long-run (Ugwumadu 2011).
In policy term, working in partnership with the families is an aspiration to share knowledge, responsibilities and to maximise resources for the benefit of all stakeholders. The concept of partnership with and within families is conditional, layered and would sometimes be completely elusive. However, reinvention of family reciprocity and partnership with the state could be a means of progressing beyond professional dominated care system and practical engagement. Family members tend to respond to situations that they have been involved with, listened to and their views respected. In common with long-term care planning for older relatives, family participants would respond constructively if they are being asked what they would recommend, and what plans and services they believe would benefit their older relatives.
The care model is aimed to be a care pathway and a robust set of idea that is continually challenged and refined as we move forward with preparedness to changing policies, procedures and structures in the wider welfare systems. It is systematic approach to reinvent traditional family care systems and the opportunities inherited within that system, so that key support and interfaces are maintained. The ideology would remain relevant and responsive to the growing population and care needs of older people. The key emphasis of this study is on restructure and reconstruction of personal social services for older people and the systematic approach is to maintain a high level of quality and human capacity consistent to meet the increasing older relative’s aspirations (Ugwumadu 2011).
The focal point on traditional family care systems would reassert for example, two things: Firstly, family is socially moralist than strangers as some would see family care giving as a duty to reciprocate. Secondly, family is seen as the basis for stability and strong moral foundations in society, albeit alongside a recognition that the family is changing (reconstituted and composite family). In ideal world, a traditional family oriented care system could offer stability and security in a fast moving world of globalisation, migration, demographic change and smaller family units. My view is that the family should be seen as part of that world, expressing flexibility and inclusive to form a long lasting contemporary welfare systems.
The decline in traditional family care systems has contributed to a greater welfare dependency, especially among older people who tends to rely on the state for their functional activities of daily living. The reassertion of strong collective values in the community requires the family. The family has a lot to offer particularly that associated with personal social services for older relatives and the growing welfare dependency. In policy terms, the care model is articulated as a reaction to the failure of both political ideology and legislation to shift the power balance to the traditional care model with adequate support system to enhance their socio-economic needs to continue in their caring role (Ugwumadu 2011). In practice as well as in policy terms, there has been an unhealthy polarisation between liberals who affirm individualism, and tend to take a relativistic view of family values and structures, and conservatives who talk a lot about values but neglect household economies. Yet we have been presented with a false choice. Problems being experienced by families today are rooted both in economic stress and in family disintegration. Any progressive family policy must address both these issues or it will fail.
Family directed support care systems would contribute to the reconstruction of politics, which prioritises responsibilities and obligations that individual/family members owe in the community. On reflection, this thesis has argued for family members to undertake holistic care needs assessment of their older relatives and provides care, it is hoped, and this would help to reduce pressure on social workers. The commentary also illuminates the plight of the family caregiver’s socio-economic needs, which has been a concern for some family caregivers to continuing care for older relatives. Given the changing economic situations in society and carers’ financial needs, this article indicated the need for family assessor/caregiver to be paid for the services they render to older relatives.
I demonstrate that family forms matters because they both requires and underpins individual responsibilities in promoting family holistic wellbeing for example, continuing care for older relatives and children. The arguement is that the state alone would not be able to meet the increasing needs of older people in the future, unless families are involved in reshaping the power balance.
No comments:
Post a Comment