Social Policy for Social Work, Social Care and the Caring Professions

Scottish Perspectives

Janine Bolger, Steve Hothersall

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2016
• Print ISBN:
  9780367475598
• eBook ISBN:
  9781317053583
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Social Policy
• Index: Politics & International Relations

Since devolution in 1999, social policy within Scotland has burgeoned. The Scottish Parliament has a range of powers in relation to key policy areas including social work, education, health, child care, child protection, law and home affairs, and housing. These powers and the existence of a distinct legal tradition in Scotland means that social work practice has developed a distinctive style, attuned to the particular needs of Scotland. Scottish distinctiveness however, has rarely been properly represented in textbooks on either social policy or social work. This innovative text offers comprehensive coverage of the discipline of social policy and its central relevance to social work, social care and related practice in Scotland. Designed to complement teaching and study associated with the new Honours degree in Social Work (Scottish Executive 2003), it fills a notable gap in the literature on this subject and will be essential reading for students, professionals and academics within a variety of health and social care occupations.

Part I

Context

1 What is social policy?

Steve J. Hothersall

Introduction

In this chapter we shall provide a general overview of the subject area of social policy and look in general terms at what it is, how it is made, why it exists and what it generally looks like. We shall also consider the relationship between social policy and the law and the relevance to and the effect upon professional practice, highlighting some significant themes that will be developed in subsequent chapters.

In the world of social work and related professions and disciplines, policy is everywhere. Some would say that over the past 10–15 years there has been a veritable explosion of policy-making. When New Labour came to power in 1997, there was an increased emphasis upon ‘government by objectives’ tied very much to the ‘what works?’ agenda and the whole notion of ‘modernising government’ (Cabinet Office 1999). Within Scotland, as in the rest of the UK, there is still a clear focus around these centralised themes. If you look at the Scottish Government website (http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/), you can see at a glance the differing, broad policy areas to which the Government addresses itself. These policies have an influence upon the lives of all of us, directly or indirectly, so it is worth spending some time becoming familiar with these areas and this is a good place to start. It is also the case that policy development, as one aspect of government, is based on the notion of collective decision-making (Scottish Government 2008a).

What is social policy?

Social policy is a subject area that appears unfamiliar to most people when you refer to the topic, and yet it affects all of us on a daily basis and it is probably true to say that most of us think or hear about it every day. Even giving a cursory glance to a daily newspaper or listening to your favourite radio station, you will invariably come across some reference to social policy. Look at the box and undertake Exercise 1.1.

---

Exercise 1.1 Policies for everyone!

Think about your own personal situation and make a list of the types of ‘policies’ that exist in your own home. For example, you might have a policy that says that everyone who comes into the house by the front door must remove their shoes before going into the living room. This is the ‘Shoe Removal Policy’. You may also have a policy that says that the last person to go to bed at night must check that all the doors are locked. This is the ‘Check the Doors are Locked Last Thing at Night Policy’. And so on.

When you have done your list, think of these as your own ‘social policies’ for your own social space. Why do you have them? What is their purpose? What would happen if these ‘policies’ did not exist or were not followed? How would this make life at home?

(This exercise, when done with groups of students, highlights a fascinating (and often hilarious!) range of policies and offers interesting insights into how we all attempt to order our private lives, sometimes in very different ways!).

Now, think about other social phenomenon: the care and protection of children, the treatment of people with a mental disorder, the provision of education and health care. These issues are deemed to be of such importance to us as a society as to require a coherent and consistent response to them so that irrespective of who you are or where you are, you are guaranteed to obtain help or access to a particular service whenever you need it. Ideally, the assistance received should be of high quality, coherently planned and managed and efficiently delivered in accordance with the individual’s requirements (needs). Whether these characteristics are present at an individual level is as much about practice as it is about policy, but from the broad perspective of policy, dealing with broad-based social phenomena is, in principle, no different from putting in place arrangements for dealing with issues at home. The issue of whether such collective and state-coordinated responses to such phenomena are the most appropriate will be the subject of discussion in Chapter 3.

The basic function of any policy, social or otherwise (for example economic policy, agricultural policy, defence policy) is to provide what I will refer to (ideally) as a coherent and consistent response to particular (social) phenomena. In the examples above regarding your own social space, such phenomena initially referred to removing shoes and locking doors.

Briefly, that is what a social policy is and why it exists. So the next time you listen to the radio, watch the TV or go on-line, make a note of the range of information you find that relates to social policy.

---

In terms of definitions, social policy can be regarded as referring to the ‘actions taken within society to develop and deliver services for people in order to meet their needs for welfare and wellbeing’ (Alcock 2008: 2), whereas the study of social policy ‘is concerned with those aspects of public policies, market operations, personal consumption and interpersonal relationships which contribute to, or detract from, the well-being or welfare of individuals or groups’ (Erskine cited in Alcock, Erskine and May 2003: 15). The study of public/social policy used to be referred to as social administration and had as its central concern the impact of those policies connected to what used to be referred to as ‘the big five’. These were health, education, the personal social services, and social security and housing, which were those areas of governmental intervention that were seen as priorities after the Second World War (see Chapter 2). Respectively, these interventions were designed to address what were perceived as the five giant ills affecting society at that time; respectively disease, ignorance, want, idleness and squalor.

Central to an understanding of social policy is the issue of public (state) involvement in private life. When we refer to social policy, we are referring to public policy, that is, that policy made by government(s), (arguably) on behalf of the people through the (democratic) political process. Erskine (cited in Alcock, Erskine and May 2003: 15) goes on to remind us that social policy ‘explores the social, political, ideological and institutional context within which welfare is produced, distributed and consumed. It seeks to provide an account of the processes which contribute to or detract from welfare, and it does this within a normative framework which involves debating moral and political issues about the nature of the desired outcomes’ (emphases added), whereas Jones et al. (2004) refer to policy as being ‘a set of ideas and proposals for action culminating in a government decision’ (p. 596). Thus, to study policy is to study (collective) decision-making.

Hill (2005) reminds us that policymaking is not a simple linear process or one that involves just a few key (governmental) individuals. He suggests the following:

• Firstly, that a decision network may be involved in producing action (via policy), which may itself be quite complex and may involve a number of people across a range of different agencies, organisations and departments, many of whom may be unknown to each other.

• Secondly, that policy is often not expressed as a single decision; it is often expressed as a series of decisions which, when taken as a whole, represent the policy position on a particular issue. Examples here would be child care policy (Hothersall 2008) and mental health policy (Hothersall, Maas-Lowit and Golightley 2008), both of which cover a range of issues including early intervention, prevention, support, treatment and public education. This should remind us of the need to be aware of the inter-relationships between policies and policy areas and to try to appreciate the influence each may have on the other, particularly when the connections may not be immediately apparent. For example, changes to policy surrounding housing allocations for homeless people may (inadvertently) affect the chances of someone with a learning disability leaving residential care being allocated their own tenancy because the priority for the allocation of houses has now shifted its focus.

• Thirdly, that policy will change over time and may represent aspects of major change or reform as well as incremental adjustments to existing policies in response to changing circumstances. It is a fact that many existing policies are founded upon earlier policy positions, which may not always be a good thing. Incremental policy change can be effective but it can also simply ‘tinker at the edges’ and avoid addressing what may well be deeper underlying issues.

• Finally, that policy ‘decisions’ may in fact arise as a result of non-decisions or inaction. For example, where the government is seen not to act in relation to certain issues, a response may be forced upon them if things begin to get out of hand. Thus, not doing something initially may result in an untenable situation becoming apparent which forces the government to take action to control the consequences of previous inaction. Some writers would argue that this constitutes a significant proportion of the policy-making activity of governments today (Dery 1999).

Another view taken by Gil (1992) is that the term ‘social policy’ can be conceived of as having four distinct but interrelated uses:

• As a philosophical concept representing the principle whereby political entities and large organisations (in this sense, society) collectively seek enduring solutions to the problems that affect them. In this sense, this notion would present itself as the polar opposite of individualism.

• As a product referring to the conclusions reached by those who concern themselves with the betterment of community and social conditions and social life generally, along with the amelioration of deviance (as defined at any given time) and social disorganisation by reference to the presence of an effective and efficient policy.

• As a process which, through its products seeks to promote and maintain stability whilst improving conditions. Most extant (current) policies are developments or additions to pre-existing ones and have therefore not gone through the full policy formation process.

• As a framework for action, incorporating both product and process. In this sense, it assumes the presence of well developed policies implemented within a context which is flexible enough to respond effectively to changes in values, structures and the conditions of the so-called ‘target group’ (Gil 1992: 4).

Gil’s commentaries and analyses are quite penetrating, as he makes the point that simply to equate social policies with social welfare is to fragment the social world and detach it from the influences of the wider world, particularly the effects of economics and, more recently, the effects of globalisation. He argues that one of the inherent weaknesses of social policy development and analysis is that social policies are often developed simply to absorb the social fall-out of economic and other policies, rather than being the driving force in defining the shape of social organisations and societies. In the West at least, economics is often perceived as the ‘Grand Master’. We shall look further at these issues when we consider the relationship between people and policy in Chapter 4.

All governments at various times have recognised the need for a more or less consistent approach to particular (social) issues, often as a means of ensuring that social order does not break down. The historical antecedents of policy are an important element in helping you to understand policy and Chapter 2 looks at this in some depth. Over time, various approaches to the issues of social living and the attendant prospect of social disorder have resulted in the creation of a wide range of policies that are and have been applied to particular situations at particular times with variable effects, and are evident from medieval times to the present day. How differing governments have formulated and subsequently implemented or given effect to policies depends as much upon ideology and the nature of government in that society at that particular time as it does upon the perceived and/or expressed needs of the people. In some societies, policies are repressive and implemented with force, often being designed to control the people and express the will (or the whim) of the government, or monarch in some instances. In the West (to be broadly interpreted), democracy as the prevailing form of government attempts to develop policy along the lines of the perceived needs of society as a whole with the needs of the individual being largely assumed to be represented within that general, often state-coordinated response, certainly in the UK and many other developed countries. Inevitably in such an arrangement there will be those who disagree with certain policy approaches to certain issues and will attempt to have their voice heard through the democratic process. At a more acute level, the presence of certain approaches to certain phenomena will, adopting the above ‘broad-brush’ approach, leave some people marginalised as their requirements (needs) may not quite ‘fit’ into the policy frame. In these instances, policy makers would claim that they can and will review and modify policy in response to representation regarding these perceived inadequacies. Very often it will be social workers and other professionals who are the best people to highlight the limitations of policy and to bring these to the attention of managers and, ultimately, policy makers. It must be emphasised here that because professional workers are those tasked to implement government policy, they are really the major players in determining how effective policy is in relation to actually meeting people’s needs.

Policy and the law

The language used to describe policy often confuses many students. Is policy the same as law? Is law policy? What is a ‘strategy’? What about government ‘initiatives’ and ‘consultations’? What about ‘Rules and Regulations’, ‘Secondary Legislation’ and (Scottish) Statutory Instruments? Often, these terms are used interchangeably, particularly where there are references to the law.

---

Sources of Scots Law

These can be ranked thus:

1. legislation

2. judicial precedent

3. institutional writings

4. custom

5. equity
(see Auchie et al. 2006).

Our concern here is with legislation and the different types of it that exist. UK Parliamentary legislation is held to be supreme and therefore the most significant legislation within Scotland is still the legislation of the UK Parliament in spite of the presence of the Scottish Parliament; the doctrine of the supremacy of Parliament remains intact. It was the passing of the Scotland Act 1998 that created the Scottish Parliament and granted to it (under section 28) the power to make laws, but only in those areas where it has been granted legislative competency through a range of devolved powers (under section 29) (see below).

UK Parliamentary/Scottish Parliamentary Legislation

Government usually initiates these Acts of Parliament/Acts of the Scottish Parliament and once approved and given Royal Assent, they become laws. This type of legislation (or ‘statute law’) is also referred to as ‘primary legislation’.

Subordinate Legislation

Ministers or other executive bodies often make this type of legislation (also called ‘delegated’ or ‘secondary’ legislation) by reference to provisions previously laid out in primary legislation. This is done because any Act can only really concern itself with the broad principles of the matter being referred to and MPs/MSPs are not experts on the matters being legislated for (for example, child care or mental health). Subordinate legislation, which has the same force as primary legi...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Half Title Page
• Dedication
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• List of figures
• List of tables
• List of contributors
• Foreword
• Introduction
• Part I Context
• Part II Themes and issues
• Part III Policy for practice
• Index