Aging and Social Change

M. W. Riley
{"title":"Aging and Social Change","authors":"M. W. Riley","doi":"10.4324/9780429046933-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":": In Australia, there currently exists a large disparity between the accommodation models available in the aged care and disability sectors, specifically in relation to institutional living. At the same time that institutions are actively discouraged (and legislated against in some areas) for younger individuals with disability, they remain a dominant and growing model for older members of society unable to care for themselves. Further to this, there is evidence that newer accommodation models are concurrently being held up as innovative in one sector and heavily criticised in the other. This article critically reviews the history of each sector in Australia to identify factors that have contributed to this schism. Factors highlighted range from government policy, advocacy, human rights legislation, and lack of alternatives, through to structural forces (such as universal healthcare). This comparative review also considers research from other parts of the world, where similar discrepancies have been identified. A number of solutions are proposed to this problem for researchers, policy makers, and front-line workers. Given that essentially both camps are grappling with the same core problem, specifically how to house and care for individuals who are unable to fully care for themselves, it is timely that we address this human rights issue and start working toward greater alignment and equity.","PeriodicalId":317565,"journal":{"name":"Aging from Birth to Death","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aging from Birth to Death","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429046933-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

: In Australia, there currently exists a large disparity between the accommodation models available in the aged care and disability sectors, specifically in relation to institutional living. At the same time that institutions are actively discouraged (and legislated against in some areas) for younger individuals with disability, they remain a dominant and growing model for older members of society unable to care for themselves. Further to this, there is evidence that newer accommodation models are concurrently being held up as innovative in one sector and heavily criticised in the other. This article critically reviews the history of each sector in Australia to identify factors that have contributed to this schism. Factors highlighted range from government policy, advocacy, human rights legislation, and lack of alternatives, through to structural forces (such as universal healthcare). This comparative review also considers research from other parts of the world, where similar discrepancies have been identified. A number of solutions are proposed to this problem for researchers, policy makers, and front-line workers. Given that essentially both camps are grappling with the same core problem, specifically how to house and care for individuals who are unable to fully care for themselves, it is timely that we address this human rights issue and start working toward greater alignment and equity.
老龄化与社会变革
在澳大利亚,目前在老年护理和残疾部门的住宿模式之间存在很大差距,特别是在机构生活方面。与此同时,机构积极劝阻(在某些地区立法禁止)为年轻的残疾人提供服务,它们仍然是无法照顾自己的老年社会成员的主要和日益增长的模式。此外,有证据表明,新的住宿模式在一个部门被视为创新,而在另一个部门受到严厉批评。本文批判性地回顾了澳大利亚每个部门的历史,以确定导致这种分裂的因素。重点强调的因素包括政府政策、宣传、人权立法和缺乏替代方案,以及结构性力量(如全民医疗保健)。这一比较审查也考虑了来自世界其他地区的研究,在那里发现了类似的差异。针对这一问题,研究者、政策制定者和一线工作者提出了一些解决方案。考虑到两个阵营基本上都在努力解决同样的核心问题,特别是如何为无法充分照顾自己的人提供住房和照顾,我们现在应该解决这个人权问题,开始朝着更大的协调和平等方向努力。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信