Citizenship, disability rights and the changing relationship between formal and informal caregivers: it takes three to tango

References

• Barton, L. 1993. “The Struggle for Citizenship: The Case of Disabled People.” Disability, Handicap & Society 8(3): 235–48. doi:10.1080/02674649366780251.
   Google Scholar
• Biesta, G., M. De Bie, and D. Wildemeersch. 2013. Civic Learning, Democratic Citizenship and the Public Sphere. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Boeije, H. 2005. Analyseren in kwalitatief onderzoek. In Denken en Doen [Analyzing in Qualitative Research. Thinking and Doing]. Den Haag: Boom/Lemma.
   Google Scholar
• Bogdan, R. C., and S. K. Biklen. 2007. Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction to Theory and Methods. 5th ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, F. K. 2009. Contours of Ableism. The Production of Disability and Abledness. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Carey, A. C. 2003. “Beyond the Medical Model: A Reconsideration of ‘Feeblemindedness’, Citizenship and Eugenic Restrictions.” Disability & Society 18(4): 411–30. doi:10.1080/0968759032000080977.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox, R. H. 1998. “The Consequences of Welfare Reform: How Conceptions of Social Rights Are Changing.” Journal of Social Policy 27(1): 1–16.
   Google Scholar
• Daly, M., and J. Lewis. 2000. “The Concept of Social Care and the Analysis of Contemporary Welfare States.” The British Journal of Sociology 52(2): 281–98. doi:10.1111/j.1468-4446.2000.00281.
   Google Scholar
• Dean, H. 2015. Social Rights and Human Welfare. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Denzin, N., and Y. Lincoln. 2003. The Landscape of Qualitative Research: Theories and Issues. Londen: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Devisch, I. 2017. Het Empatisch Teveel. Op Naar Een Werkbare Onverschilligheid [the Empathic Overload. Towards a Workable Indifference]. Amsterdam: De Bezige Bij.
   Google Scholar
• Dowse, L. 2009. “Some People Are Never Going to Be Able to Do That: Challenges for People with Intellectual Disability in the 21st Century.” Disability & Society 24(5): 571–84. doi:10.1080/09687590903010933.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fine, M., and C. Glendinning. 2005. “Dependence, Independence or Interdependence? Revisiting the Concepts of Care and Dependency.” Ageing & Society 25(4): 601–21. doi:10.1017/S0144686X05003600.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellis, K. 2005. “Disability Rights in Practice: The Relationship between Human Rights and Social Rights in Contemporary Social Care.” Disability & Society 20(7): 691–04. doi:10.1111/j.1468-4446.2000.00281.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fyson, R., and D. Kitson. 2007. “Independence or Protection: Does It Have to Be a Choice? Reflections on the Abuse of People with Learning Disabilities in Cornwall.” Critical Social Policy 27(3): 426–86. doi:10.1177/0261018307078850.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrett, P. M. 2015. “Words Matter: Deconstructing ‘Welfare Dependency’ in the UK.” Critical and Radical Social Work 3(3): 389–406. doi:10.1332/204986015X14382412317270.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrett, P. M. 2018. Welfare Words: Critical Social Work and Social Policy. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Goodley, D. 2014. Dis/Ability Studies: Theoreising Disablism and Ableism. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Goodley, D., and G. Roets. 2008. “The (Be)Comings and Goings of Developmental Disabilities: The.” Cultural Politics of Impairment.” Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 29(2): 241–57. doi:10.1080/01596300801966971.
   Google Scholar
• Goodley, D., and K. Runswick-Cole. 2011. “Big Society? Disabled People with the Label of Learning Disabilities and the Queer(y)Ing of Civil Society.” Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research 17(1): 1–13. doi:10.1080/09687599.2011.618743.
   Google Scholar
• Goodley, D., and C. Tregaskis. 2006. “Storying Disability and Impairment: Retrospective Accounts of Disabled Family Life.” Qualitative Health Research 16(5): 630–46. doi:10.1177/1049732305285840.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grootegoed, E., and D. Van Dijk. 2012. “The Return of the Family? Welfare State Retrenchment and Client Autonomy in Long-Term Care.” Journal of Social Policy 41(4): 677–94. doi:10.1017/S0047279412000311.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harpur, P. 2012. “Embracing the New Disability Rights Paradigm: The Importance of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.” Disability & Society 27(1): 1–14. doi:10.1080/09687599.2012.631794.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hood, R. 2014. “Complexity and Integrated Working in Children’s Services.” British Journal of Social Work 44(1): 27–43. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcs091.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hsieh, H. F., and S. E. Shannon. 2005. “Three Approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis.” Qualitative Health Research 15(9): 1277–88. doi:10.1177/1049732305276687.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Inckle, K. 2015. “Debilitating Times: Compulsory Ablebodiedness and White Privilege in Theory and Practice.” Feminist Review 111(1): 42–58. doi:10.1057/fr.2015.38.
   Google Scholar
• Jordan, B., and M. Drakeford. 2012. Social Work and Social Policy under Austerity. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Kabeer, N. 2005. Inclusive Citizenship: Meanings and Expressions. London: Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Kisby, B. 2010. “The Big Society: Power to the People?” The Political Quarterly 81(4): 484–91. doi:10.1111/j.1467-923X.2010.02133.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kjellberg, A. 2002. “Being a Citizen.” Disability & Society 17(2): 187–203. doi:10.1080/09687590120122232.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koops, H., and M. Kwekkeboom. 2005. “(Goed) burgerschap van mensen met een beperking [(Good) Citizenship of People with Disabilities].” In De Goede Burger. Tien Beschouwingen over Een Morele Categorie, edited by P. Dekker and J. de Hart, 111–122. Den Haag: Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau.
   Google Scholar
• Koster, M. 2014. “Bridging the Gap in the Dutch Participation Society: New Spaces of Government, Brokers, and Informal Politics.” Etnofoor, Participation 26(2): 49–64. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43264059.
   Google Scholar
• Kwekkeboom, M. 2010. De Verantwoordelijkheid Van de Mensen Zelf. De (Her)Verdeling Van de Taken Rond Zorg en Ondersteuning Tussen Overheid en Burgers en de Betekenis Daarvan Voor de Professionele Hulpverlening [the Responsibility of the People Themselves. The (Re)Distribution of Care and Support Tasks between Government and Citizens and the Significance of This for Professional Assistance]. Amsterdam: HvA publications.
   Google Scholar
• Lid, I. M. 2015. “Vulnerability and Disability: A Citizenship Perspective.” Disability & Society 30(10): 1554–67. doi:10.1080/09687599.2015.1113162.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lister, R. 1997. Citizenship: Feminist Perspectives. London: Macmillan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lister, R. 2007. “Inclusive Citizenship: Realizing the Potential.” Citizenship Studies 11(1): 49–61. doi:10.1080/13621020601099856.
   Google Scholar
• Lister, R., and F. Bennett. 2010. “The New ‘Champion of Progressive Ideals’? Cameron’s Conservative Party: Poverty.” Family Policy and Welfare Reform.” Renewal 18(1/2): 84–109. https://search.proquest.com/docview/211527636?accountid=11077.
   Google Scholar
• Lorenz, W. 2016. “Rediscovering the Social Question.” European Journal of Social Work 19(1): 4–17. doi:10.1080/13691457.2015.1082984.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mansell, J. 2006. “Deinstitutionalisation and Community Living: Progress, Problems and Priorities.” Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability 31(2): 65–76. doi:10.1080/13668250600686726.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mladenov, T. 2012. “Personal Assistance for Disabled People and the Understanding of Human Being.” Critical Social Policy 32(2):242–61. doi:10.1177/0261018311430454.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mladenov, T., J. Owens, and A. Cribb. 2015. “Personalisation in Disability Services and Healthcare: A Critical Comparative Analysis.” Critical Social Policy 35(3): 307–26. doi:10.1177/0261018315587071.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McRuer, R. 2002. “Compulsory Able-Bodiedness and Queer/Disabled Existence.” In Disability Studies: Enabling the Humanities, edited by R. Garland-Thomson, B. J. Brueggemann, and S. L. Snyder, 88–99. New York: MLA Publications.
   Google Scholar
• McRuer, R. 2006. Crip Theorie. Cultural Stages of Queerness and Disability. New York: University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Moonen, X. 2015. Is inclusie van mensen met een verstandelijke beperking vanzelfsprekend? Over een inclusieve samenleving in verbondenheid met mensen met een verstandelijke beperking en sociaal kwetsbare mensen met beperkte cognitieve vaardigheden. [Is the Inclusion of People with Intellectual Disabilities Obvious? About an Inclusive Society in Solidarity with Disabled and Socially Vulnerable People with Cognitive Impairments]. Inaugural speech, April 22, 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Morel, N. 2007. “From Subsidiarity to ‘Free Choice’: Child- and Elder-Care Policy Reforms in France, Belgium, Germany and The Netherlands.” Social Policy & Administration 41(6): 618–37. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9515.2007.00575.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayring, P. 2010. “Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse [Qualitative Content Analysis].” In Handbuch Qualitative Forschung in Der Psychologie, edited by G. Mey and K. Mruck, 601–613. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. doi:10.1007/978-3-531-92052-8_42.
   Google Scholar
• Nussbaum, M. 2006. Frontiers of Justice: Disability, Nationality, Species Membership. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Patton, M. Q. 2002. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Pavolini, E., and C. Ranci. 2008. “Restructuring the Welfare State: Reforms in Long-Term Care in Western European Countries.” Journal of European Social Policy 18(3): 246–59. doi:10.1177/0958928708091058.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peräkylä, A. 2008. “Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis, Vol 1.” Review of Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis. Vol. 1, by Schegloff, E.” Discourse & Communication 2(3): 357–63. doi:10.1177/17504813080020030402.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richter, M., and S. Andresen. 2012. “Places of Good Childhood? Growing up in the Tension of Familial and Public Liability.” Zeitschrift Fur Soziologie Der Erziehung Und Sozialisation 32(3): 250–65.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts, B. 2002. Biographical Research. Buckingham – Philadelphia: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Roets, G., V. Dermaut, T. Benoot, T. Schiettecat, R. Roose, W. Van Lancker, and S. Vandevelde. In preparation. “A critical analysis of disability policy and practice in Flanders: towards differentiated manifestations of interdependency.”
   Google Scholar
• Rolph, S., D. Atkinson, M. Nind, and J. Welshman. 2005. Witnesses to Change: Families, Learning Difficulties and History. Kidderminster: BILD Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Runswick-Cole, K., and D. Goodley. 2011. “Big Society: A Dismodernist Critique.” Disability & Society 26(7): 881–5. doi:10.1080/09687599.2011.618743.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stainton, T. 2002. “Taking Rights Structurally: Disability, Rights and Social Worker Responses to Direct Payments.” British Journal of Social Work 32(6): 751–63. doi:10.1093/bjsw/32.6.751.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schuyt, C. J. M. 1972. “Recht, orde en burgerlijke ongehoorzaamheid [Law, Order and Civil Disobedience].” PhD diss., Leiden University.
   Google Scholar
• Vandeurzen, J. 2010. Perspectief 2020: Nieuw Ondersteuningsbeleid Voor Personen Met Een Handicap [Perspective 2020: A New Support Policy for Disabled People]. Brussels: Department of Welfare, Public Health and Family Affairs, 9 July 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Vandeurzen, J. 2013. Conceptnota Persoonsvolgende Financiering Voor Personen Met Een Handicap. [Concept Note for Direct Payments for People with Disabilities]. Brussels: Department of Welfare, Public Health and Family Affairs, 7 May 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Vandeurzen, J. 2015. Beleidsbrief Welzijn, Volksgezondheid en Gezin 2015-2016 [Policy Letter on Welfare, Public Health and Family 2015-2016]. Brussels: Flemish Parliament.
   Google Scholar
• Van Gennep, A., and C. Steman. 1997. Beperkte Burgers: Over Volwaardig Burgerschap Voor Mensen Met Verstandelijke Beperkingen [Limited Citizens: About Full Citizenship for People with Intellectual Disabilities]. Utrecht: NIZW.
   Google Scholar
• Van Gennep, A. 2007. Waardig Leven Met Beperkingen. Over Veranderingen in de Hulpverlening Aan Mensen Met Beperkingen in Hun Verstandelijke Mogelijkheden [Worthy Living with Disabilities. About Changes in the Support of People with Intellectual Disabilities]. Antwerp: Garant.
   Google Scholar
• Van Gennep, A., and G. Van Hove. 2000. “Zijn Het Burgerschapsparadigma en Inclusie Dan Niet Bruikbaar Voor Mensen Met Een Ernstige Verstandelijke Handicap? Kanttekeningen Bij Een Zorgelijke Ontwikkeling [Does the Paradigm of Citizenship and Inclusion Not Fit for People with Severe Disabilities? Comments on a Worrying Development].” Nederlands Tijdschrift Voor de Zorg Aan Verstandelijk Gehandicapten 26(4): 246–55. http://hdl.handle.net/1854/LU-132910
   Google Scholar
• Vanhoutteghem, Inge, Geert Van Hove, Geert D'haene, and Veerle Soyez. 2014. “I Never Thought I Would Have to Do This: Narrative Study with Siblings-in-Law Who Live Together with a Family Member with a Disability.” British Journal of Learning Disabilities 42(4): 315–22. doi:10.1111/bld.12077.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vanobbergen, B. 2014. “Warm of Koud? De Vermaatschappelijking Van de Jeugdzorg Is Hot. [Warm or Cold? the ‘Vermaatschappelijking’ of Youth Care Is Hot].” Cahier Integrale Jeugdhulp 3: 51–66.
   Google Scholar
• Villadsen, K. 2007. “The Emergence of 'Neo-Philanthropy': A New Discursive Space in Welfare Policy?” Acta Sociologica 3(50):309–23. doi:10.1177/0001699307080938.
   Google Scholar
• Warming, H., and K. Fahnoe. (eds.) 2017. Lived Citizenship on the Edge of Society. Rights, Belonging, Intimate Life and Spatiality”. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Watson, N., L. McKie, B. Hughes, D. Hopkins, and S. Gregory. 2004. “(Inter)Dependence, Needs and Care: The Potential for Disability and Feminist Theorists to Develop an Emancipatory Model.” Sociology 38(2): 331–50. doi:10.1177/0038038504040867.
   Google Scholar
• Williams, F. 1999. “Good-Enough Principles of Welfare.” Journal of Social Policy 28(4): 667–87. doi:10.1017/S0047279499005760.
   Google Scholar
• Williams, F. 2001. “In and beyond New Labour: Towards a New Political Ethics of Care.” Critical Social Policy 21(4): 467–93. doi:10.1177/026101830102100405.
   Google Scholar