Social Welfare (社会福利)

Welfare System Social Welfare - or public charity, organized provision of educational, cultural, medical, and financial assistance to the needy. Modern social welfare measures may include any of the following: the care of destitute adults; the treatment of the mentally ill; the rehabilitation of criminals; the care of destitute, neglected, and delinquent children; the care and relief of the sick or handicapped; the care and relief of needy families; and supervisory, educational, and constructive activity, especially for the young.1. The Development of Social Work2. Modern Social Work3. Comparing welfare states4. Examples5. The politics of welfare1.The Development of Social WorkSocial work emerged as a profession out of the early efforts of churches and philanthropic groups to relieve the effects of poverty, to bring the comforts of religion to the poor, to promote temperance and encourage thrift, to care for children, the sick, and the aged, and to correct the delinquent. Orphanages and homes for the elderly were typical results of these activities. The word charity best describes the early activities, which were aimed at the piecemeal alleviation of particular maladjustments. In such charitable work the principal criterion in determining aid to families was worthiness, while the emphasis in later social work was on restoring individuals to normal life both for their own sake and for the sake of the community.The first attempts to solve the problem of poverty in a modern scientific way was made by P. G. F. Le Play, who in the 1850s made a detailed study of the budgets of hundreds of French workers' families. Forty years later Charles Booth investigated wages and prices, working conditions, housing and health,standards of living, and leisure activities among the poor of London and revealed the extreme poverty of a third of the population. Booth's social survey became a method for determining the extent of social maladjustment, and through surveys in other cities in Europe and the United States a vast number of facts were accumulated, and methods were developed that provided the basis for modern social work.In 1874 the National Conference of Charities and Correction (now called the National Conference on Social Welfare) was organized in the United States. Public relief and private philanthropic effort remained largely matters of local and state concern until after 1930, when the federal government entered the field of social work on a large scale to cope with the effects of the Great Depression. Resources were made available, the number of social workers was greatly increased, and it became necessary to coordinate public and private activities. Social work has been steadily professionalized, and special graduate schools as well as departments in universities have been established to train social workers. By 1999 there were 377 accredited undergraduate schools of social work in the United States.2.Modern Social WorkModern social work employs three methods of assistance: case work, group work, and community organization. Case work is the method by which individual persons and families are assisted. The person in need of case work may be physically, mentally, or socially handicapped. Among those regarded as socially handicapped are: the unemployed, the homeless, members of broken families, alcoholics, drug addicts, and neglected or problem children. To determine the cause of maladjustment, the social worker must understand individual psychology as well as the sociology of the community. Physicians, psychiatrists, and other specialists may be required to help diagnose the difficulty.Social group work is exemplified by the social settlement, the supervised playground and gymnasium, and the classroom, where handicrafts may be learned. The community may be called upon to provide the buildings and grounds for such activities; often the services of volunteers and of public groups are utilized; in recent years people living in poverty areas have been employed to work in and direct poverty projects in their own communities. Through community organization the welfare work of single agencies as well as of whole communities is directed, cooperation between public and private agencies is secured, and funds are raised and administered. The funds required by private agencies are often pooled in a community chest, from which each agency receives a share. Community welfare councils areorganized to map programs of rehabilitation, to eliminate duplication of services, and to discover and meet overlooked needs.4. ExamplesChild WelfareChild Welfare - services provided for the care of disadvantaged children. Foundling institutions for orphans and abandoned children were the earliest attempts at child care, usually under religious auspices. At first the goal was to provide minimum physical subsistence, but services have been expanded to include social and psychological help. In the late 18th cent., a movement developed around the idea that children should not simply be regarded as small adults, and such educators as Rousseau, Pestalozzi, and Froebel were discussing children's special needs at the same time that the Industrial Revolution intensified the nonagricultural exploitation o f child labor. In the 19th cent. many religious and private institutions were organized to take care of children who were orphaned, destitute, or handicapped. In child-welfare legislation, the British Children's Charter Act of 1908 and the Ohio Children's Code Commission of 1911 marked a new era. The idea that it was the responsibility of the community to provide children with the advantages that their parents could not supply is a 20th-century development. In this category are free school lunches; medical, dental, and psychiatric services and child guidance clinics in schools; playgrounds; children's courts; special schools for handicapped children; and care in foster families for children of broken homes. Infant and child clinics are often provided by municipalities. Many social welfare agencies finance summer camps for both healthy and handicapped children. In the United States child welfare services are administered through the Administration for Children and Families within the U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services. A series of new child welfare programs were passed by Congress in the 1960s. These included the Child Nutrition Act, the Head Start Program, and the Foster Grandparent Program. The International Union for Child Welfare (1920) organized relief for child victims of major international and national disasters. The United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF, 1946) targets malnutrition and helps reestablish children's services destroyed in war. Current child welfare concerns include child abuse and child care (see day nursery).HomelessnessHomelessness - the condition of not having a permanent place to live, widely perceived as a societal problem only beginning in the 1980s. Estimates of thenumber of homeless people in the United States are imprecise, but in the late 1990s ranged from 700,000 per night to 2 million per year. A survey made in 1994 found that 12 million Americans had experienced homelessness at some point in their lives; the vast majority of those who are homeless consists of single men and families with children. The problem exists in all major cities and many smaller communities. The causes range from large-scale deinstitutionalization of mentally ill people to disintegration of the social fabric in minority communities, drug and alcohol abuse, cutbacks in federalsocial-welfare programs, job loss, and real-estate speculation.Single parentsThe rise in single parenthood is mainly based on three factors: ∙Divorce, which has been increasing as women have gainedindependence in finance and career;∙Unemployment. Unemployment is correlated with divorce, partly because it strains the marriage, and partly, perhaps, because it hasundermined the role of the traditional male breadwinner.∙Cohabitation. This effect is a statistical artefact, rather than a real change in parental status.There is no reason to attribute the rise to teenage motherhood (which, like other forms of motherhood, has tended to fall).The position of single parents who receive social benefits has been controversial. The liberal individualist position is that if people choose to have children it's then up to them to look after their family. The collectivist position, and to a large extent the dominant position in continental Europe, is that children are other people's business as well. There is also a strong body of opinion which considers that the interests of the children override any moral concerns about the status of the parents.Teenage pregnancyTeenage pregnancy was the norm in previous generations, but it has become more common for women to delay childbearing. The reasons for the delay, and for falling birthrates, include∙the effect of urban society on the cost of having children;∙the changing role of women;∙the economic effect of female employment, which leads to a loss of income if women leave the labour market to have children;∙increasing education and later marriage; and∙the availability of contraception.Teenage pregnancy is highest when these factors do not apply to the same degree. This accounts for the apparent association of some social problems with teenage pregnancy.paring welfare statesDeborah Mitchell [1] identifies five main approaches to the comparison of welfare systems:∙Comparison of policy, comparing the explicit terms in which actions are taken. Flora and Heidenheimer review the historical development ofwelfare in Europe and America. They find that welfare in differentcountries often develops on similar lines. [2]∙Comparison of inputs. Inputs are the resources which go into welfare provision. For example, Wilensky's work on welfare spending showsthat the main determinants are the age of the system and the structure of the population. [3]∙Comparing production. Different states operate different kinds of rules and structures. Esping-Andersen uses evidence on the organisationand delivery of specific services to define positions adopted by different welfare states. [4]∙Comparing operations. This is done by considering the detailed operation of benefits and services - what they do, how they are paid for, and who runs them.∙Comparing outcomes. The case can be made that what matters about welfare is not what is intended, nor what the process is, but whether or not people benefit from it. This is the basis of the work done by theLuxembourg Income Study in assessing and comparing social security systems in different countries.The United Kingdom: the Welfare StateAsa Briggs, in a classic essay on the British welfare state, identified three principal elements. These were∙ a guarantee of minimum standards, including a minimum income;∙social protection in the event of insecurity; and∙the provision of services at the best level possible. [5]This has become identified, in practice, with the 'institutional' model of welfare: the key elements are social protection, and the provision of welfare services on the basis of right.In practice, social welfare in the United Kingdom is very different from this ideal. Coverage is extensive, but benefits and services are delivered at a low level. The social protection provided is patchy, and services are tightly rationed. Germany: the Social MarketThe post-war German settlement was based on the idea of a 'social state', sometimes rendered as a 'social market economy'. The first, central principle was that economic development was the best way to achieve social welfare. The structure of social services had to reflect this priority. The principle is represented most clearly in the close relationship of services to people's position in the labour market. Social benefits are earnings-related, and those without work records may find they are not covered for important contingencies. Less clear, but probably even more important, is the general concern to ensure that public expenditure on welfare is directly compatible with the need for economic development and growth.Second, the German economy, and the welfare system, developed through a corporatist structure. This principle was developed by Bismarck on the basis of existing mutual aid associations, and remained the basis for social protection subsequently. Social insurance, which covers the costs of health, some social care and much of the income maintenance system, is managed by a system of independent funds.Third, there is a strong emphasis on the principle of "subsidiarity". This principle is taken in Germany to mean both that services should be decentralised or independently managed, and that the level of state intervention should be residual - that is, limited to circumstances which are not adequately covered in other ways. Higher earners are not covered by the main social insurance system, but are left to make their own arrangements. France: Solidarity and insertionSocial protection in France is based on the principle of solidarity: the commitment is declared in the first article of the French Code of Social Security. The principle is used in a number of different senses. The idea seems, at first sight, to refer to co-operative mutual support. Some writers apply the term inrelation to 'mutualist' groups (friendly societies) and emphasise that people insured within national schemes (les assurés sociaux) are called to contribute and benefit on an equal footing. Others stress that relationships of solidarity are based in interdependence. Solidarity is usually understood, in this context, in terms of common action, mutual responsibility and shared risks.The pursuit of 'national solidarity' was undertaken in the first place by attempting progressively to extend the scope of existing solidarities, most notably through the creation of a 'régime général' for health and social security, and subsequently through its progressive expansion. Since the 1970s this pattern of solidarities has been supplemented by additional measures designed to bring 'excluded' people into the net. The most important of these measures is the Revenu Minimum d'Insertion (RMI), introduced in 1988, which combines a basic benefit with a personal contract for 'insertion' or social inclusion.The French system of welfare is a complex, patchwork quilt of services. This kind of arrangement is relatively expensive, and much of the focus of social policy in recent years has fallen on the control of expenditure - filling 'the hole in the social', le trou de la Sécu. The main areas of concern are not dependency or unemployment, but pensions, because of the special privileges accorded to particular occupational groups, and spending on health care, where the stress on independent, market-led services (la médicine libérale) presents considerable problems in cost control.Sweden: the Institutional-Redistributive modelThe Swedish model can be seen as an ideal form of 'welfare state', offering institutional care in the sense that it offers universal minima to its citizens. It goes further than the British model in its commitment to social equality. Titmuss's 'institutional-redistributive' model combines the principles of comprehensive social provision with egalitarianism. This is an "ideal type", rather than a description of reality. Social protection is not necessarily associated with equality; the French and German systems offer differential protection according to one's position in the labour market. The Swedish system, looked at in greater detail, has many of the same characteristics: Ringen describes the system as "selective by occupational experience". [6] However, the importance of equality - sometimes identified with 'solidarity', in the sense of organised co-operation - is considerable. The model of this is the 'solidaristic wage policy' advocated by the labour movement, which emphasised improving standards, limited differentials, and redistribution.The United States: a 'liberal' regimeThe United States is sometimes described as a ‘liberal'welfare regime, in the sense that it represents individualism,laissez-faire, residualism and a punitive view of poverty. These issues often seem to dominate US debates on welfare: examples are the introduction of'workfare', the exclusion of long-term benefit dependents, and the criticism of the 'underclass'.The US does not, however, have a unified welfare system. Federalism has meant that many important functions are held by the States, including public assistance, social care and various health schemes (Minnesota and Hawaii have state-funded health systems). By comparison with other developed countries, central government has had a limited role in social welfare provision: the main developments of federal provision were during the Roosevelt administration of the 1930s, which laid the foundations for the social security system, and the "War on Poverty" of the 1960s, which provided some important benefits (notably health care for people on low incomes) and engaged the federal government in a wide variety of projects and activities at local level.In practice, the US is pluralistic, rather than liberal. There are significant departures from the residual model - e.g. state schooling, social insurance, or the Veterans' Administration, which provides health care for nearly 40 million people. In addition to federal and state activity, there are extensive private, mutualist and corporate interests in welfare provision. The resulting systems are complex (and expensive): the guiding principle is less one of consistent individualism than what Klass has called "decentralised social altruism". [7] 5.The politics of welfareGovernmentEdmund Burke wrote that "government is a contrivance of human wisdom to provide for human wants".(1) Governments have a wide range of possible actions.Governments establish rules. Governments set the rules by which they and other organisations (like companies or charities) operate.∙Governments ernments can prohibit action (such as child abuse), or require some forms of action (such as sending children toschool).∙Governments provide or purchase services. Provision means that states provide services themselves. Public housing, national healthservices or state education are examples. Purchasing services impliesthat the state accepts responsibility for ensuring provision, but that theservice can be obtained from another agency.∙Governments subsidise.Subsidy consists of a financial inducement to act in a particular way, which may be a reward for doing things (e.g.increasing employment), a form of compensation , or an incentive to do things. Tax can be used in the opposite direction, as a negative subsidy - e.g. to deter people from smoking.∙Governments persuade. Examples are propaganda, exhortation and directed education.∙Governments plan. Governments 'steer' a society by watching and adjusting policy.∙Governments produce. Like independent organisations, governments may offer services to customers - e.g. insurance, banking orcommercial production. There is no rule which says that governmentactivity has to be tax-based or financed.From the perspective of welfare, the main political positions are:MarxismMarxists see society in terms of a conflict between economic classes. A dominant class (the bourgeoisie or 'capitalist' class) owns and controls the means of production; an industrial working class, the 'proletariat', is exploited by them. The marxist analysis of welfare concentrates principally on its relationship to the exercise of power. The state can be seen either as an instrument of the ruling capitalist class, or as a complex set of systems which reflects the contradictions of the society it is part of. It is often argued that welfare has been developed through the strength of working-class resistance to exploitation.Marxism is not a single doctrine; it has come to stand for a wide range of opinions within an analytical framework that is critical of 'capitalist' society. Neo-marxists argue that the state has two main functions. The first is to improve the conditions for the accumulation of capital - that is, the chance for industries to make profits. The second is to legitimate the capitalist system, by introducing measures (like welfare policies, pensions and health services) which lead people to accept the system as it stands. The requirements of accumulation and legitimation may be contradictory, and the costs of legitimation have led to a 'legitimation crisis'.The basic objections to marxist analyses are that the description of 'capitalism' is false; that power in society is divided, and not based in ownership; and that states which promote the welfare of their citizens are not pretending to be more legitimate - they are more legitimate.SocialismSocialism is misrepresented in many popular reference books. There is not one common thread, but many competing understandings. Socialism has been represented as∙ a general movement for the improvement of society by collective action ∙ a set of methods and approaches linked with collective action, such as cooperatives, mutual aid, planning and social welfare services;∙ a set of arguments for social and economic organisation based on ownership and control by the community;∙an ideal model of society based on cooperation and equality;∙ a critique of industrial society, and∙most persuasively, a range of values, rather than a particular view of how society works.The key socialist values are collectivism, empowerment and egalitarianism, though some socialists would add to that issues of rights and democracy.∙Socialism is collectivist: people have to be understood in social context, rather than as individuals. Socialism is often represented in Europe interms of 'solidarity', which means not only standingshoulder-to-shoulder but the creation of systems of mutual aid.∙Socialism calls for people to be enabled to do things through collective action, a principle variously referred to as 'freedom' and (in recent years) as 'empowerment'. This principle has been central to 'guild socialism'and trades unionism.∙Socialism is egalitarian, in the sense that socialists are committed to the reduction or removal of disadvantages which arise in society. The'Fabian' tradition, a reformist movement, attempted to achieve greaterequality through spending on social services.These principles - empowerment, equality, and solidarity - are usually described in other terms. They are the 'liberty, equality, and fraternity' of the French revolution, interpreted in collective and social terms.Historically, socialism is strongly associated with working-class movements, and in much of Europe 'socialist' issues are closely linked with labour relations. It is not equivalent to marxism: although marxists often represent their approaches and beliefs as intrinsic to 'socialism', the marxist analysis ofsociety is irrelevant to much of the mainstream of European socialism, which grew from a range of religious, occupational and communal groups.Social democracyThe differences between social democrats and socialists are hazy, because their ideals may coincide in some aspects and not in others, but two are particularly important. First, many social democrats are individualists rather than collectivists; even if they accept arguments for mutual aid or the reduction of disadvantage, they think it important to stress the liberty of the individual, to develop individual rights (as liberals do), and often to restrict the role of the state. Second, some social democrats are not concerned to remove inequality, but only to mitigate its effects through social arrangements which protect people from the worst consequences of a market society.ConservatismConservatives believe in the importance of social order. This is reflected in a respect for tradition, an emphasis on the importance of religion, and a stress on the importance of inequality - such as inequalities of class or caste - as the basis for structured social relationships. Welfare is a secondary issue, but the kinds of concerns which conservatives have are likely to impose restraints on welfare, with a particular emphasis on traditional values in work, the family, and nationhood. Welfare does raise concern where it is seen to have implications for public order - one British conservative commented, in commending the Beveridge report, that "if you do not give the people social reform they are going to give you revolution."Christian democratic thought is closely related to conservatism, but it also has important distinguishing features. Like conservatives, Christian Democrats place a strong emphasis on order; but order is to be achieved, not primarily through state action, but by moral restraints. These moral restraints have principally in Europe reflected the influence of the Catholic religion. Catholic social teaching has emphasised both the limits of the state and the responsibility of people in families and communities for each other; christian democrats tend, then, to favour limitations in the role of the state while at the same time accepting moral responsibility for social welfare.Liberal individualismLiberalism begins from the premise that everyone is an individual, and that individuals have rights. As a political position, liberalism has been important as a means of defending people from abuse by authority. Although liberalism was initially a radical doctrine, it has also been used since the 19th century to stand for a defence of propertied interests.The central value of liberalism is freedom. All freedoms are not equally important; the main liberal values are concerned with certain particularly important freedoms, such as freedom of assembly, of speech, and of worship. Liberals mistrust the state and argue that society is likely to regulate itself if state interference is removed. Hayek argues that all state activity, whatever its intentions, is liable to undermine the freedom of the individual; that society is too complex to be tampered with; and that the activities of the free market, which is nothing more than the sum total of activities of many individuals, constitute the best protection of the rights of each individual.。