Critique of deinstitutionalisation in postsocialist Central and Eastern Europe

References

• Angelova, L. 2008. Patyat kam Mogilino: Ideologiyata na normalnostta i izostavenite detsa na Balgariya[the Road to Mogilino: The Ideology of Normality and Bulgaria’s Abandoned Children]. Sofia: Center for Independent Living. http://www.cil.bg/userfiles/nabliudatelnitsa/Putqt_kum_Mogilino.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Balázs, Z., and G. Petri. 2010. “Az autizmussal élőket segítő magyarországi civil ellátórendszer kialakulása [Organisations Helping Autistic People in Hungary and Their Role in the Development of Policies and Services].” in Láthatatlanok. Autista emberek a társadalomban. [Invisibles. Autistic People in Society], edited by V. Bognár, Budapest: Scolar, 36–77.
   Google Scholar
• Bernát, A., B. Simonics, Á. Kozma, and M. Kopasz. 2017. “Értelmi fogyatékossággal élő felnőttek életminősége intézetben, lakóotthonban, magánháztartásban[Quality of Life of People with a Learning Disability in Institutions, Group Homes and Private Households.]” Esély 5: 3–38.
   Google Scholar
• Bugarszki, Z., O. Eszik, Á. Soltész, and I. Sziklai. 2010. “One Step Forward, Two Steps Backwards”. Deinstitutionalisation of Large Institutions and Promoting Community-Based Living in Hungary Through the Use of the Structural Funds of the European Union. Budapest: Soteria Foundation – Eotvos Lorand University.
   Google Scholar
• CIL 2013. Poveche ot sashtoto ili mimikriyata – bolest po sotsialnite uslugi v Balgariya[More of the same or mimicry – a disease of social services in Bulgaria]. Sofia: Center for Independent Living. Available online at: http://cil.bg/userfiles/Community-Services-Comparative-Analysis-Final.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Dale, G. (ed.) 2011. First the Transition, Then the Crash. Eastern Europe in the 2000s. London: Pluto Press.
   Google Scholar
• DeJong, G. 1979. “Independent Living: From Social Movement to Analytic Paradigm.” Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 60(10): 435–446.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deneva, N., and R. Petrov. 2016. ‘Zhivot na Volya Ili po Chuzhda Volya! Politikata na t. nar. “Deinstitutsionalizatsiya” (DI) v Balgariya i Posleditsite za Pravoto na Nezaisim Zhivot na Horata s Uvvrezhdaniya, Koito sa Obekt na Tazi Politika’[Living Free or under Control! the Policy of the so-Called “Deinstitutionalisation” (DI) in Bulgaria and the Consequences for the Right to Live Independently of People with Disabilities Targeted by This Policy]. Online publication. Sofia: Center for Independent Living. Available online at: http://cil.bg/userfiles/nabliudatelnitsa/Report-DI-Final.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Duffy, S. 2010. “The Citizenship Theory of Social Justice: Exploring the Meaning of Personalisation for Social Workers.” Journal of Social Work Practice 24 (3): 253–267. doi:10.1080/02650533.2010.500118.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duffy, S. 2011. A Fair Society and the Limits of Personalisation. Sheffield: The Centre for Welfare Reform. https://www.centreforwelfarereform.org/uploads/attachment/261/a-fair-society-and-the-limits-of-personalisation.pdf
   Google Scholar
• EEG [European Expert Group on the Transition from Institutional to Community-based Care] 2012. Common European Guidelines on the Transition from Institutional to Community-Based Care. Brussels: European Expert Group on the Transition from Institutional to Community-Based Care.
   Google Scholar
• ÉFOÉSZ 2017. Kiváltás./Deinstitutionalisation. Budapest: Éfoész.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission 2010. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. European Disability Strategy 2010–2020: A Renewed Commitment to a Barrier-Free Europe. COM(2010) 636 final. Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Evans, J. 2002. Independent Living Movement in the UK. Leeds: The Disability Archive UK. https://disability-studies.leeds.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/40/library/evans-Version-2-Independent-Living-Movement-in-the-UK.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Ferge, Z. 1997a. “The Changed Welfare Paradigm: The Individualization of the Social.” Social Policy & Administration 31 (1): 20–44. doi:10.1111/1467-9515.00035.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferge, Z. 1997b. “Women and Social Transformation in Central-Eastern Europe: The “Old Left” and the “New Right.” Sociologický Časopis/Czech Sociological Review 5 (2): 159–178.
   Google Scholar
• Foucault, M. 2006 [1961]. History of Madness. Translated and edited by J. Khalfa and J. Murphy. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Fröhlich, C. 2012. “Civil Society and the State Intertwined: The Case of Disability NGOs in Russia.” East European Politics 28 (4): 371–389. Vol. No. doi:10.1080/21599165.2012.718269.
   Google Scholar
• Goffman, E. 1974 [1961]. Asylums: Essays on the Social Situation of Mental Patients and Other Inmates. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
   Google Scholar
• Golemanov, H., and M. Popov. 1976. Social Welfare in the People’s Republic of Bulgaria. Translated and edited by D. Lambrinov. Sofia: Sofia Press.
   Google Scholar
• Grigorova, V. 2016. Bedni Sreshtu Bedni./Poor against Poor. Sofia: Kolektiv za Obshtestveni Interventsii.
   Google Scholar
• Hartblay, C. 2014. “A Genealogy of (Post-)Soviet Dependency: Disabling Productivity.” Disability Studies Quarterly 34 (1): doi:10.18061/dsq.v34i1.4015.
   Google Scholar
• Harvey, D. 2005. Brief History of Neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hauben, H.,. M. Coucheir, J. Spooren, D. McAnaney, and C. Delfosse. 2012. Assessing the Impact of European Governments’ Austerity Plans on the Rights of People with Disabilities. Brussels: European Consortium of Foundations on Human Rights and Disability – Bernhard Brunhes International BPI Group.
   Google Scholar
• Holland, D. 2008. “The Current Status of Disability Activism and Non‐Governmental Organizations in Post‐Communist Europe: Preliminary Findings Based on Reports from the Field.” Disability & Society 23 (6): 543–555. doi:10.1080/09687590802328337.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hungarian Parliament 1998. 1998. évi XXVI. törvény a fogyatékos személyek jogairól és esélyegyenlőségük biztosításáról [Law on the rights and equal opportunities of disabled persons 1998/26]. http://net.jogtar.hu/jr/gen/hjegy_doc.cgi?docid=99800026.TV
   Google Scholar
• Human Rights Watch 2016. “It Is My Dream to Leave This Place” – Children with Disabilities in Serbian Institutions. New York: Human Rights Watch. Available online at: https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/report_pdf/serbia0616web_0.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Inclusion Europe and Inclusion International 2005. Poverty and Intellectual Disability in Europe. Brussels: Inclusion Europe. Available online at: http://inclusion-europe.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/SocInc_EUPovertyRreport.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Konings, M. 2018. “From Hayek to Trump: The Logic of Neoliberal Democracy.” Socialist Register Vol. 54: 48–73.
   Google Scholar
• Kozma, A., and G. Petri. 2012. Mapping Exclusion. Institutional and Community-Based Services in the Mental Health Field in Europe. Brussels: Mental Health Europe.
   Google Scholar
• Kozma, A., G. Petri, A. Balogh, and M. Birtha. 2016. The Role of EU Funding in Deinstitutionalisation (DI) in Hungary and the Experiences of the DI Programme so Far. Budapest: Hungarian Civil Liberties Union.
   Google Scholar
• KSH 2015. 2011. Évi Népszámlálás - 17. A Fogyatékossággal Élők Helyzete és Szociális Ellátásuk./Population Census 2011 - Vol. 17. Persons with disabilities and social services. Budapest: Központi Statisztikai Hivatal.
   Google Scholar
• Lewis, O. 2002. “Mental Disability Law in Central and Eastern Europe: Paper, Practice, Promise.” International Journal of Mental Health and Capacity Law (8): 293–303. doi:10.19164/ijmhcl.v0i8.335.
   Google Scholar
• Kormány, M. 2018. A Kiváltási Program Minőségi Garanciája a Nemzetközi Együttműködés [International Cooperation Is the Guarantee of the Quality of Deinstitutionalisation]. Budapest: Hungarian Government. http://www.kormany.hu/hu/emberi-eroforrasok-miniszteriuma/szocialis-ugyekert-es-tarsadalmi-felzarkozasert-felelos-allamtitkarsag/hirek/a-kivaltasi-program-minosegi-garanciaja-a-nemzetkozi-egyuttmukodes
   Google Scholar
• Mansell, J., M. Knapp, J. Beadle-Brown, and J. Beecham. 2007. Deinstitutionalisation and Community Living – Outcomes and Costs: Report of a European Study. Volume 2: Main Report. Canterbury: Tizard Centre, University of Kent.
   Google Scholar
• Mladenov, T. 2018. Disability and Postsocialism. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Mladenov, T. 2017. “Governing through Personal Assistance: A Bulgarian Case.” Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research 19 (2): 91–103. doi:10.1080/15017419.2016.1178168.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mladenov, T. 2016. “Marketisation, Direct Payments, Disability Justice and Austerity.” Discover Society No. (29)2 February 2016. http://discoversociety.org/2016/02/02/policy-briefing-marketisation-direct-payments-disability-justice-and-austerity/
   Google Scholar
• Mladenov, T. 2015. “Neoliberalism, Postsocialism, Disability.” Disability & Society 30 (3): 445–459. Vol. No. doi:10.1080/09687599.2015.1021758.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mladenov, T. 2009. “Institutional Woes of Participation: Bulgarian Disabled People’s Organisations and Policy-Making.” Disability & Society 24 (1): 33–45. doi:10.1080/09687590802535386.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nagy, Z. É., Z. Kondor, B. Panyik, A. Riz, and I. Sziklai. 2017. Támogatott Lakhatási Szolgáltatások. Áttekintés az Intézményi Férőhelykiváltás Során Létrejött Támogatott Lakhatási Szolgáltatások Működésének Első Tapasztalatairól [Supported Living Services. Experiences of Supported Living Services Created during the First Phase of Deinstitutionalisation]. Budapest: .Fszk
   Google Scholar
• Oliver, M., and C. Barnes. 2012. The New Politics of Disablement. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Open Society Foundations 2012. Petition to the European Parliament. Budapest: The Open Society Foundations. ttps://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/sites/default/files/petition-eu-parliament-20121018.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Parker, C. 2010. “Wasted Time, Wasted Money, Wasted Lives… a Wasted Opportunity?” Tizard Learning Disability Review 15 (4): 4–14. doi:10.5042/tldr.2010.0588.
   Google Scholar
• Parker, C., L. Angelova-Mladenova, and I. Bulic. 2016. Working Together to Close the Gap between Rights and Reality. A Report on the Action Needed to Ensure That European Structural and Investment Funds Promote, Not Hinder, the Transition from Institutional Care to Community Living. Brussels: European Network on Independent Living – European Coalition for Community Living. Available online at: http://enil.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Working-Together-to-Close-the-Gap.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Parker, C., and I. Bulic. 2016. European Structural and Investment Funds and People with Disabilities in the European Union. Study for the PETI Committee. Brussels: European Parliament.
   Google Scholar
• Parker, C., and I. Bulic. 2013. Briefing on Structural Funds Investments for People with Disabilities: Achieving the Transition from Institutional Care to Community Living. Dublin: European Network on Independent Living – European Coalition for Community Living. Available online at: http://www.enil.eu/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Structural-Fund-Briefing-final-WEB.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Parker, C., I. Bulic, and N. Kokic. 2017. European Union Structural and Investment Funds and the Transition from Institutional Care to Community Living: Towards a More Effective Monitoring and Complaints System. Brussels: European Network on Independent Living. http://enil.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/OurRightsCampaign-Briefing_FINAL.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Parker, C., and L. Clements. 2012. “The European Union Structural Funds and the Right to Community Living.” The Equal Rights Review Vol. 9No. (1): 95–116.
   Google Scholar
• Petri, G., J. Beadle-Brown, and J. Bradshaw. 2017a. “More Honoured in the Breach than in the Observance” – Self-Advocacy and Human Rights.” Laws 6 (4): 1–20.
   Google Scholar
• Petri, G., and Á. Kozma. 2017b. “Közösségi Életvitel és Intézményi Férőhelykiváltás Magyarországon. Kritikai Elemzés’/‘Community Living and Deinstitutionalisation in Hungary. A Critical Analysis.” Esély (5): 39–63.
   Google Scholar
• Phillips, S. D. 2012. “Implications of EU Accession for Disability Rights Legislation and Housing in Bulgaria, Romania, Croatia, and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.” Journal of Disability Policy Studies 23 (1): 26–38. Vol. No. doi:10.1177/1044207311414681.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phillips, S. D. 2009. “There Are No Invalids in the USSR!”: a Missing Soviet Chapter in the New Disability History.” Disability Studies Quarterly 29 (3). http://www.dsq-sds.org/article/view/936/1111 doi:10.18061/dsq.v29i3.936.
   Google Scholar
• Priebe, S., A. Badesconyi, A. Fioritti, L. Hansson, R. Kilian, F. Torres-Gonzales, T. Turner, and D. Wiersma. 2005. “Reinstitutionalisation in Mental Health Care: Comparison of Data on Service Provision from Six European Countries.” BMJ 330 (7483): 123–126. doi:10.1136/bmj.38296.611215.AE.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quinn, G., and S. Doyle. 2012. Getting a Life – Living Independently and Being Included in the Community: A Legal Study of the Current Use and Future Potential of the EU Structural Funds to Contribute to the Achievement of Article 19 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Brussels: Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Regional Office for Europe.
   Google Scholar
• Ratzka, A. 1996. STIL, the Stockholm Cooperative for Independent Living. Stockholm: Independent Living Institute. http://www.independentliving.org/docs3/stileng.html
   Google Scholar
• Roulstone, A., and S. Prideaux. 2012. Understanding Disability Policy. Bristol: The Policy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Scharle, Á., and D. Szikra. 2015. “Recent Changes Moving Hungary Away from the European Social Model.” in The European Social Model in Crisis: Is Europe Losing Its Soul? Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 289–339.
   Google Scholar
• Šiška, J., and J. Beadle-Brown. 2011. “Developments in Deinstitutionalization and Community Living in the Czech Republic.” Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities 8 (2): 125–133. Vol. No. doi:10.1111/j.1741-1130.2011.00298.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, A., and A. Rochovská. 2007. “Domesticating Neo-Liberalism: Everyday Lives and the Geographies of Post-Socialist Transformations.” Geoforum 38 (6): 1163–1178. Vol. No. doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2007.03.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Šumskienė, E., and L. Orlova. 2015. “Sexuality of “Dehumanized People” across post-Soviet Countries: Patterns from Closed Residential Care Institutions in Lithuania.” Sexuality & Culture 19 (2): 369–387. doi:10.1007/s12119-014-9262-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Šumskienė, E., K. Levickaitė, U. Grigaitė, and J. Kelpšaitė. 2015. Independent Living and Community Inclusion. Monitoring Implementation of UN CRPD Art. 19 in Lithuanian Social Care Institutions. Vilnius: NGO Mental Health Perspectives.
   Google Scholar
• Szikra, D., and B. Tomka. 2009. “Social Policy in East Central Europe: Major Trends in the Twentieth Century.” in Post-Communist Welfare Pathways: Theorizing Social Policy Transformations in Central and Eastern Europe, edited by A. Cerami and P. Vanhuysse. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 17–34.
   Google Scholar
• Tobis, D. 2000. Moving from Residential Institutions to Community-Based Social Services in Central and Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union. Washington, DC: World Bank.
   Google Scholar
• Turnpenny, A. 2011. “Deinstitutionalisation and Community-Based Care for Adults with Intellectual Disabilities in Hungary: Policy Change, Challenges and Outcomes.” (Unpublished PhD). Canterbury: Tizard Centre, University of Kent.
   Google Scholar
• Turnpenny, A., G. Petri, A. Finn, J. Beadle-Brown, and M. Nyman. 2018. Mapping and Understanding Exclusion: Institutional, Coercive and Community-Based Services and Practices across Europe. Brussels: Mental Health Europe doi: 10.22024/UniKent/01.02/64970.
   Google Scholar
• Verdes, T. 2015. Megrendülhet Magyarországon az Intézetek Egyeduralma [the Dominance of Residential Institutions May Be Challenged in Hungary]. Budapest: Hungarian Civil Liberties Union. Available online at: https://ataszjelenti.blog.hu/2015/11/18/1500_fogyatekos_ember_vegre_elhagyja_az_intezeteket
   Google Scholar
• Walker, G. 2011. “Postcommunist Deinstitutionalization of Children with Disabilities in Romania: Human Rights, Adoption, and the Ecology of Disabilities in Romania.” Journal of Disability Policy Studies 22 (3): 150–159. doi:10.1177/1044207311394853.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiener, A., and G. Schwellnus. 2004. “Contested Norms in the Process of EU Enlargement: Non-Discrimination and Minority Rights.” Constitutionalism Web-Papers No. 2/2004: 1–39.
   Google Scholar
• World Bank 2003. Social Development in Europe and Central Asia Region: Issues and Directions. Washington, DC: World Bank. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTECAREGTOPNGOCIVSER/Resources/Social_Development_Strategy.pdf
   Google Scholar