The power of discretion and the discretion of power: personal assistants and sexual facilitation in disability services

J. Bahner
{"title":"The power of discretion and the discretion of power: personal assistants and sexual facilitation in disability services","authors":"J. Bahner","doi":"10.3402/vgi.v4i0.20673","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim The purpose of this article is to explore how personal assistants, working in state-funded services for mobility-disabled people in Sweden, perceive and experience their work, with special focus on sexual facilitation (assistance with sexual activities). Background Personal assistance services are a legal right, aiming to give certain disabled people the possibility to live on equal terms in society with non-disabled citizens. The services are to be grounded on the principles of self-determination, autonomy, integrity, and user influence according to independent-living ideology. However, the legislation does not mention sexuality, and in addition, there are often no local policies; hence, it is unclear what service users can demand in terms of sexual facilitation, and on the assistants’ part, what is and what is not acceptable to assist with. Methods The methods used to gather data were interviews with 15 personal assistants as well as observations in an online discussion forum for personal assistants. Findings The analysis suggests that personal assistants may experience that there is a taboo against discussing sexual facilitation in the workplace. There are no predetermined policies, regulations, or ethical codes of conduct regarding sexual facilitation, and the personal assistants’ discretion is therefore strong. Different strategies for managing this discretion were identified, greatly influenced by personal values, as well as societal norms. Conclusion The normative context of discretion is highly visible, suggesting the importance of uncovering the interplay between the power dimensions of sexuality, disability, gender, and professionalism.","PeriodicalId":356239,"journal":{"name":"Vulnerable Groups & Inclusion","volume":"57 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vulnerable Groups & Inclusion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3402/vgi.v4i0.20673","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

Aim The purpose of this article is to explore how personal assistants, working in state-funded services for mobility-disabled people in Sweden, perceive and experience their work, with special focus on sexual facilitation (assistance with sexual activities). Background Personal assistance services are a legal right, aiming to give certain disabled people the possibility to live on equal terms in society with non-disabled citizens. The services are to be grounded on the principles of self-determination, autonomy, integrity, and user influence according to independent-living ideology. However, the legislation does not mention sexuality, and in addition, there are often no local policies; hence, it is unclear what service users can demand in terms of sexual facilitation, and on the assistants’ part, what is and what is not acceptable to assist with. Methods The methods used to gather data were interviews with 15 personal assistants as well as observations in an online discussion forum for personal assistants. Findings The analysis suggests that personal assistants may experience that there is a taboo against discussing sexual facilitation in the workplace. There are no predetermined policies, regulations, or ethical codes of conduct regarding sexual facilitation, and the personal assistants’ discretion is therefore strong. Different strategies for managing this discretion were identified, greatly influenced by personal values, as well as societal norms. Conclusion The normative context of discretion is highly visible, suggesting the importance of uncovering the interplay between the power dimensions of sexuality, disability, gender, and professionalism.
自由裁量权和权力的自由裁量权:残疾人服务中的个人助理和性便利
本文的目的是探讨在瑞典为行动不便人士提供国家资助服务的个人助理如何感知和体验他们的工作,特别关注性便利(性活动的协助)。个人援助服务是一项法律权利,旨在使某些残疾人有可能与非残疾公民平等地生活在社会中。这些服务将根据独立生活的意识形态,以自决、自主、完整和用户影响的原则为基础。然而,立法没有提到性,此外,往往没有地方政策;因此,在性便利方面,服务使用者可以要求什么是不明确的,而在助理方面,什么是可以接受的,什么是不可以接受的。方法对15名个人助理进行访谈,并在网上个人助理论坛进行观察。分析表明,私人助理可能会体验到在工作场所讨论性便利是一种禁忌。在促进性行为方面,没有预先确定的政策、法规或道德准则,因此私人助理的自由裁量权很强。在很大程度上受到个人价值观和社会规范的影响下,人们确定了管理这种自由裁量权的不同策略。自由裁量权的规范性背景是非常明显的,这表明揭示性、残疾、性别和专业精神的权力维度之间相互作用的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信