Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Critical Social Policy
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (2)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Stevens, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Closer to Home: A Critique of British Government Policy towards Accommodating Learning Disabled People in Their Own Homes

Andy Stevens

Anglia Polytechnic University

This review of British government policy on accommodation for people with learning disability compares two White Papers: Better Services for the Mentally Handicapped(DHSS, 1971) and Valuing People(DOH, 2002). NHS employment issues muted the influence of Better Services. Statistics show a slow transfer from the NHS to other providers, but little development of independent living alternatives since 1971, despite a policy emphasis on social inclusion themes in recent policy. Promotion of housing choice, where residential care provision dominates, inhibits inclusive housing. Valuing Peopledoes not address the potentially conflicting choices of disabled people and their families and is critical of local authorities for not supporting large-scale residential care. Supported living alternatives cannot receive sufficient support where residential care agencies’ interests predominate. Better incentives are needed for local authorities to provide support for people with learning disabilities to safely live in a home of their own rather than in residential care.

Key Words: housing • inclusion • modernization • residential • supported living

Critical Social Policy, Vol. 24, No. 2, 233-254 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/0261018304041952
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Br J Soc WorkHome page
M. Stevens
Moral Positioning: Service User Experiences of Challenging Behaviour in Learning Disability Services
Br. J. Soc. Work, September 1, 2006; 36(6): 955 - 978.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]