Introduction
Social care is of vital importance in every society as there are people in every society who are disabled at birth or after accidents or due to aging (Barnes and Mercer, 2005a). It is of crucial importance for society to take care of those who cannot care for themselves (Donabedian, 1997). In England, there is a growing population of old people and adults who have some form of disability that ends up becoming the reason for them not being able to function in society normally and are in need of assistance for things (Barton and Oliver, 1997). To make society work smoothly, there is a need for taking care of such people (Barnes and Mercer, 2005).
Britain’s social and moral structure is of great stature to the British government as there is a sense of exceptional greatness that is driven by the history of the UK, and this pride is shown through its policies (Kumar, 2003). In the current scenario, some developments show that the general public is tilted toward a more American way of thinking that is self-centered and more inward-looking. However, at the same time, the policies still demonstrate a role of the assumed greatness that “Great Britain” was proud of (MacShane, 2016). The policies on disabled people in this way are of huge significance as they make up the main line of defense for the keeping of the pride of the greatness of Britain and everything that it stands for.
The report’s authors are all distinguished workers in different social work organizations who have different fields of work but have high stakes in government policies toward disabled people. All of the authors work in their capacities to improve English society in particular and global society in general. The report discusses the problems that disabled people are facing in England as they are not cared for properly enough, and they are at risk of losing more of the remaining benefits that they currently pose in the wake of the new legislation. Over 105,000 disabled adults risk losing the basic care support that is vital to them. The report joins the experiences of disabled people and their caretakers and the projections on the matter in the future.
Summary of the report
The report (Brawn et al., 2013) starts with facts about the situation of disabled people. The report gives statistical data on how many people have and will continue to lose government assistance and support to live and participate in society. The old people are represented in the government support bill but the working-age disabled people are left out of the system. Around 105,000 working-age Disabled people will lose support and necessary care in the wake of the social care reforms. The report then moves on to discuss the possible projections and future developments in this regard that will eventually make things harder for disabled people.
Disabled people who cannot stay relevant in society because of a lack of support are increasing in numbers, and the government’s negligence is the reason for that. Even the basic needs of many disabled people are not met. 36% of disabled adults cannot eat, wash, and perform basic functions due to the underfunding of their respective areas. Around 47% have to withdraw from society because the support is insufficient to cater to their participation in society. The dependence on the families is also increasing leading to strained relations and other forms of alienation, isolation stress, and other such problems. Disabled people are forced to withdraw from society. They are forced to abandon their capabilities completely because they are not supported by the community and the government in doing what is needed. This is undermining their capabilities and making them more psychologically distressed. Statements like the following one are in abundance: “I am in debt with my heating costs, I can’t afford to eat, and so now I have injections four times a year. Apparently, I’m not getting the vitamins and nutrients to help my body cope with several conditions.” (Geeta), and are leading to more problems in society.
The report then discusses the possibilities of funding that can be used to help working-age disabled people without making much of a difference in the general financial situation. The authors urge the government to make the necessary funding of disabled people as it does not have many implications for the national finances, but it will do a lot of good for disabled people. The PSSRU proposes that the cost of funding for working-age disabled people is £1.2 billion, which is 0.17 percent of the public expenditure.
Why was the report needed?
The report outlines one of the most important issues that the English community faces as the rules of civility are at stake in the case of disregard for disabled people who need government assistance (Peterson, 1999). The disabled people dying or living their lives in misery is in no way a good or desirable outcome for the policymakers and the situation can be helped by £1.2 billion. The report is in a way a critique of the government policies about disabled people as it focuses on the changes that can be made to the care bill to make it more inclusive and all-encompassing, without much cost. The projections and speculations that the report bases itself on are researched and have standing in reality as it is a research work produced by a collaboration of many scholars and heads of prestigious social work organizations. The report can be seen as a solution or at least a step toward the problems that are being faced by the working-age disabled people. It can also be seen as a social work reform that would benefit a group of people and make them a useful part of society instead of being discarded from it.
Discussion and Analysis
It seems safe to assume that there are almost no documents that do not in some way relate to the comprehension of the author’s mentality, psyche, or ideology (d’Almeida and Grossi, 2016). The human perspective is one of the most insistent parts of the personality that can be seen in every single situation a person is in. Reports and research work of all kinds are supposed to be completely unbiased, but there is no way research is completely unbiased as there is no way for a person to remove himself from his work perfectly. There might be some very exceptional human beings who can, but in common research situations, there is bound to be some form of bias present. The research that is conducted for this report seems mathematical and unbiased, and it might be. Still, the fact that the conclusions that are driven by research are based on the researcher’s understanding shows that there is bound to be some form of bias in the research.
There are nearly 13.3 million disabled people in the UK, and the numbers are growing. This makes almost 1 in 5 people who are suffering from some debilitating illness. The fact that such a huge population is disabled makes taking care of them hard but more important. Only 17% of disabled people were born with the conditions, and the majority of them get these conditions later in life. The majority of the disabled people are aged elders above the state pension age but 18% of them are of the working age, and only 7% of the population of disabled people is children. However, the numbers in terms of age limits of disability are not very discouraging, but the condition of the people with these problems is not up to the mark. They do not get the desired care and support, making even simple life tasks difficult.
The report does not seem dubious, even though there could be speculations about the personal benefits of the authors of the report as they are all linked to social work, and state funding for social work might in some way benefit them. But in reality, there is no link between the two as there are no indications of such dubious dealings in the report. The report seems straightforward and can control a situation that is not a suggestion for the state to hand over the control of this whole operation to the authors and their respective organizations. The report’s focus seems fixed on helping the people who are a part of British society but are being left out of the care and support framework even when needed.
There could be one or two instances that can be forcibly connected with the ulterior motives of the authors, but that would only be a way to make fun of oneself as there are no clear indications of such ulterior motives. The funding and the care that is taken of people with disabilities is enormous in the UK, but there is still more that can be done for them. According to the report, however, no big difference will occur in the case of using £1.2 billion in general public expenditure. Still, every penny that is used in the budget is put to use in the right place. It could be argued that 1.2 billion might not seem like a big deal. Still, there are chances that the money used here might leave another sector underfunded, contributing to revenue generation and being a general public expenditure.
The aging population of the UK is a growing problem, and according to projections and speculations, the trend is on the rise (“Overview of the UK population – Office for National Statistics,” 2016). The growing number of aged people will lead to more people in need of social care and support in the coming 5-10 years, and there will be a need to put more funds into disabled people’s care. At the moment, the government’s focus seems to be on other things that can be developed for a longer period, such as transport, public facilities, and other projects that help the public. The budget transfer to the side of problems like disability support might be increased in the future, and instant action on the matter might seem futile.
One of the things that can be seen as dubious is that the government is working toward making the problem less intense by providing definitions and explanations of what should and should not be deemed as disabled. Still, the report, on the other hand, proposes to consider more and more people as disabled to make taking care of these people harder. The government is trying to cut the costs and put the money into other projects, but the report focuses on making more and more people eligible for the support. It is pushing people to the path of disability when the government hopes that the people in these cases can and should take care of themselves.
The emotive language that is used in the research when telling the stories of the people about their difficulties and hurdles is also a red flag as it gives the reader a more emotional response than the needed logical understanding of the problem (Walton and Macagno, 2015). The language that is used in the report is generally very academic and professional. Still, the stories of the people are presented with an emotive tone rather than making them seem like logical points of reference. The emotive language or use of emotion to influence the reader cannot be considered research-appropriate or without bias. However, the research element can be seen as evidence in the case of the statistical data that is provided to prove the assumptions of the research.
The research, in general, seemed very to the point and the dubious nature that was found for the paper was not completely pushing the limits. In reality, the research made sense as it talked about a little more allocation of funds for the safety and inclusion of disabled people in society. The report outlined the basic elements of the social structure that can be altered very little to cope with a huge problem increasing in magnanimity.
Conclusion
The report that is analyzed here in this paper focuses on the need to make the lives of the poor, disabled people who cannot take care of themselves, easier. The reports discuss all the statistical data along with the use of statements from disabled people and their attendants and caretakers, as well as the problems that they are facing because of the negligence of the government. The report uses emotive terms to further the proposal’s acceptance rate, allowing for an additional £1.2 billion to be allocated to the fund for disabled people.
References
Barnes, C., Mercer, G., 2005a. Disability, work, and welfare: challenging the social exclusion of disabled people. Work Employ. Soc. 19, 527–545.
Barnes, C., Mercer, G., 2005b. The social model of disability: Europe and the majority world. Disability Press Leeds.
Barton, L., Oliver, M., 1997. Disability studies: Past, present and future. Disability Press Leeds.
Brawn, E., Bush, M., Hawkings, C., Trotter, R., 2013. The Other Care Crisis: Making social care funding work for disabled adults in England. Lond. Scope Httpwww Scope Org UkAbout-UsResearch-AndPolicyPublication-Dir.–Care-Crisis.
d’Almeida, A.C., Grossi, A.S., 2016. The fascinating world of unconscious bias and development policy | Working in development | The Guardian [WWW Document].
Donabedian, A., 1997. The quality of care: how can it be assessed? Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 121, 1145.
Kumar, K., 2003. The making of English national identity. Cambridge University Press.
MacShane, D., 2016. Brexit: How Britain Left Europe. IB Tauris.
Overview of the UK population – Office for National Statistics [WWW Document], n.d.
Peterson, P.G., 1999. Gray dawn: The global aging crisis. Foreign Aff. 42–55.
Walton, D., Macagno, F., 2015. Emotive Language in Argumentation| Cambridge University Press. FifteenEightyFour Camb. Univ. Press.
