Some Ethical Limitations of Privatising and Marketizing Social Care and Social Work Provision in England for Children and Young People

ABSTRACT

This article analyses the negative ethical impact of privatisation, alongside the ongoing marketisation of social care and social work provision for children and young people in England. It critically appraises the implications of a market-based formal social care system, which includes the risk-averse and often detached role of social workers within ever more fragmented sectors of care. Analysis begins with a discussion of background policy and context. The tendency towards ‘service user’ objectification and commodification are then detailed, followed by a discussion of the limiting of choice for service users. Service and social fragmentation, and the often severely restricted ‘life chances’ of many children and young people in care, are then deliberated. The concluding discussion reiterates the ethical implications of marketisation in relation to ethical frameworks, including those associated with autonomy, informed choice, social exclusion and social justice. The tendency towards children increasingly being utilised as a means to an end within business-orientated sectors of care is highlighted, alongside moral questions asked about the State’s purpose in providing a community of support.

KEYWORDS:

• Children in care
• privatisation
• commodification
• fragmentation
• reduced life chances

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes on contributor

Malcolm Carey is Professor of Social Work at the University of Chester. He has published extensively around ageing, adult care, disability, qualitative research and ethics, including in journals such as Ageing and Society, the British Journal of Social Work, Work, Employment and Society and Organization. Among other books, he has published the Social Work Dissertation (Open University Press, 2013).

Notes

1. A quasi-market centres upon a split between a service purchaser and provider such as within a social care market. State social workers typically purchase services from a number of competing service providers.