Exploring neoliberalism in care for people with intellectual disabilities: A practice theory approach

References

• Abery, B. H., & Stancliffe, R. J. (2003). An ecological theory of self-determination: Theoretical foundations. In M. L. Wehmeyer, B. H. Abery, D. E. Mithaug, & R. J. Stancliffe (Eds.), Theory in self-determination: Foundations for educational practice (pp. 25–42). Springfield, IL: C. C. Thomas.
   Google Scholar
• Aldrich, R., & Laliberte Rudman, D. (2016). Situational analysis: A visual analytic approach that unpacks the complexity of occupation. Journal of Occupational Science, 23(1), 51–66. doi: 10.1080/14427591.2015.1045014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Association of Social Anthropologists of the UK and the Commonwealth (2011). Ethical guidelines for good research practice. Retrieved from http://www.theasa.org/ethics.shtml
   Google Scholar
• Bührmann, A. D., & Schneider, W. (2008). Vom Diskurs zum Dispositiv: Eine Einführung in die Dispositivanalyse [From discourse to dispositive: Introduction to dispositive analysis]. Bielefeld, Germany: Transcript.
   Google Scholar
• Candea, M. (2010). Anonymous introductions: Identity and belonging in Corsica. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 16(1), 119–137. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9655.2009.01600.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke, A. E. (2005). Situational analysis: Grounded theory after the postmodern turn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Clifford, J. (1992). Traveling cultures. In L. Grossberg, C. Nelson, & P. Treichler (Eds.), Cultural studies (pp. 96–116). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• DeWalt, K. M., & DeWalt, B. R. (2011). Participant observation: A guide for fieldworkers. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Dickie, V., Cutchin, M. P., & Humphry, R. (2006). Occupation as transactional experience: A critique of individualism in occupational science. Journal of Occupational Science, 13(1), 83–93. doi: 10.1080/14427591.2006.9686573
   Google Scholar
• Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (2001). Participant observation and fieldnotes. In P. Atkinson, S. Delamont, A. Coffey, J. Lofland, & L. Lofland (Eds.), Handbook of ethnography (pp. 352–368). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (2011). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Eriksen, T. H. (2001). Small places, large issues: An introduction to social and cultural anthropology. London, UK: Pluto Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ferguson, J. (2013). Declarations of dependence: Labour, personhood, and welfare in southern Africa. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 19(2), 223–242. doi: 10.1111/1467-9655.12023
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fine, M. (2007). A caring society? Care and the dilemmas of human service in the twenty-first century. Houndmills, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Finlay, M., Walton, C., & Antaki, C. (2008). Promoting choice and control in residential services for people with learning disabilities. Disability and Society, 23(4), 349–360. doi: 10.1080/09687590802038860
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fluehr-Lobban, C. (2000). Ethics. In H. R. Bernard (Ed.), Handbook of methods in cultural anthropology (pp. 173–202). Oxford, UK: Altamira Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fox, N. J. (2014). Post-structuralism and postmodernism. In W. C. Cockerham, R. Dingwall, & S. R. Quah (Eds.), The Wiley Blackwell encyclopedia of health, illness, behavior and society. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Froschauer, U., & Lueger, M. (2003). Das qualitative Interview: Zur Praxis interpretativer Analyse sozialer Systeme [The qualitative interview: The practice of interpretative analysis of social systems]. Wien, Austria: WUV.
   Google Scholar
• Gappmayer, G. (2018). The situational capacity to act: Agency and interaction practices in group homes for people with intellectual disabilities. In I. Quaranta, M. Minelli, & S. Fortin (Eds.), Assemblages, transformations, and the politics of care (pp. 127–142). Bologna: Bononia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gerlach, A. J., Teachman, G., Laliberte Rudman, D., Aldrich, R. M., & Huot, S. (2018). Expanding beyond individualism: Engaging critical perspectives on occupation. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 25(1), 35–43. doi: 10.1080/11038128.2017.1327616
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giddens, A. (1985). The constitution of society: Outline of structuration. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Girtler, R. (2009). Methoden der Feldforschung [Fieldwork methods]. Stuttgart, Germany: UTB GmbH.
   Google Scholar
• Gowan, T., Whetstone, S., & Andic, T. (2012). Addiction, agency, and the politics of self-control: Doing harm reduction in a heroin users’ group. Social Science & Medicine, 74(8), 1251–1260. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.11.045
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gupta, A., & Ferguson, J. (1997). Anthropological locations: Boundaries and grounds of a field science. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hammell, K. W. (2009). Sacred texts: A sceptical exploration of the assumptions underpinning theories of occupation. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 76(1), 6–13. doi: 10.1177/000841740907600105
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harvey, D. (2011). A brief history of neoliberalism. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hasselkus, B. R. (2002). The meaning of everyday occupation. Thorofare, NJ: Slack.
   Google Scholar
• Hochschild, A. (2003). The commercialization of intimate life: Notes from home and work. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Huot, S. (2013). Francophone immigrant integration and neoliberal governance: The paradoxical role of community organizations. Journal of Occupational Science, 20(4), 326–341. doi: 10.1080/14427591.2013.803272
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, K. R., & Bagatell, N. (2017). Beyond custodial care: Mediating choice and participation for adults with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Occupational Science, 24(4), 546–560. doi: 10.1080/14427591.2017.1363078
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kağıtçıbaşı, Ç. (2005). Autonomy and relatedness in cultural context. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36(4), 403–422. doi: 10.1177/0022022105275959
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keesing, R. M., & Strathern, A. (1998). Cultural anthropology: A contemporary perspective (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thompson Learning.
   Google Scholar
• Keller, R. (2008). Wissenssoziologische Diskursanalyse: Grundlegung eines Forschungsprogramms [Sociological discourse analysis: Establishing a research program]. Wiesbaden, Germany: VS, Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
   Google Scholar
• Kingfisher, C., & Maskovsky, J. (2008). Introduction: The limits of neoliberalism. Critique of Anthropology, 28(2), 115–126. doi: 10.1177/0308275X08090544
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kittay, E. F. (2015). Centering justice on dependency and recovering freedom. Hypatia, 30(1), 285–291. doi: 10.1111/hypa.12131
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laliberte Rudman, D. (2010). Occupational terminology. Journal of Occupational Science, 17(1), 55–59. doi: 10.1080/14427591.2010.9686673
   Google Scholar
• Laliberte Rudman, D. (2013). Enacting the critical potential of occupational science: Problematizing the ‘individualizing of occupation’. Journal of Occupational Science, 20(4), 298–313. doi: 10.1080/14427591.2013.803434
   Google Scholar
• Lamb, S. (2014). Permanent personhood or meaningful decline? Toward a critical anthropology of successful aging. Journal of Aging Studies, 29, 41–52. doi: 10.1016/j.jaging.2013.12.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mewes, J. S., Elliot, M. L., & Lee, K. (2017). Cutting through the layers: Alternating perspectives and co-laborative analytic approaches to understanding occupation and its objects. Journal of Occupational Science, 24(4), 482–493. doi: 10.1080/14427591.2017.1373374
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, L. (2003). Belonging to country: A philosophical anthropology. Journal of Australian Studies, 27(76), 215–223. doi: 10.1080/14443050309387839
   Google Scholar
• Mol, A. (2008). The logic of care: Health and the problem of patient choice. London, UK: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Niediek, I. (2010). Das Subjekt im Hilfesystem: Eine Studie zur Individuellen Hilfeplanung im Unterstützten Wohnen für Menschen mit einer geistigen Behinderung [The subject in the care system: A study of planning individualized support for people with intellectual disabilities]. Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften/GWV Fachverlage.
   Google Scholar
• Novas, C., & Rose, N. (2000). Genetic risk and the birth of the somatic individual. Economy and Society, 29(4), 485–513. doi: 10.1080/03085140050174750
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oakley, J. (2002). Thinking through fieldwork. In A. Bryman & B. Burgess (Eds.), Analyzing qualitative data (pp. 18–34). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ong, A. (2006). Experiments with freedom: Milieus of the human. American Literary History, 18(2), 229–244. doi: 10.1093/alh/ajj012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ortner, S. B. (1984). Theory in anthropology since the sixties. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 26(1), 126–166. doi: 10.1017/S0010417500010811
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peacock, M., Bissell, P., & Owen, J. (2014). Dependency denied: Health inequalities in the neo-liberal era. Social Science & Medicine, 118, 173–180. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.08.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pols, J., Althoff, B., & Bransen, E. (2017). The limits of autonomy: Ideals in care for people with learning disabilities. Medical Anthropology: Cross Cultural Studies in Health and Illness, 36(8), 772–785. doi: 10.1080/01459740.2017.1367776
   Google Scholar
• Reckwitz, A. (2010). Das hybride Subjekt: Eine Theorie der Subjektkulturen von der bürgerlichen Moderne zur Postmoderne [The hybrid subject: A theory of subject cultures from modernity to postmodernity]. Weilerswist, Germany: Velbrück Wiss.
   Google Scholar
• Schäfer, H. (2013). Die Instabilität der Praxis: Reproduktion und Transformation des Sozialen in der Praxistheorie. [The instability of practice: Reproduction and transformation of the social in practice theory]. Weilerswist, Germany: Velbrück.
   Google Scholar
• Schatzki, T. (2002). The site of the social: A philosophical account of the constitution of social life and change. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schatzki, T. (2010). Materiality and social life. Nature and Culture, 5(2), 123–149. doi: 10.3167/nc.2010.050202
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmidt, R. (2012). Soziologie der Praktiken: Konzeptionelle Studien und empirische Analysen [Sociology of practices: Conceptual studies and empirical analysis]. Berlin, Germany: Suhrkamp.
   Google Scholar
• Seifert, M. (2009). Selbstbestimmung und Fürsorge im Hinblick auf Menschen mit besonderen Bedarfen [Self-determination and care for people with special needs]. Teilhabe, 48(3), 122–128.
   Google Scholar
• Spittler, G. (2001). Teilnehmende Beobachtung als Dichte Teilnahme [Participant observation as thick participation]. Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 126(1), 1–25.
   Google Scholar
• Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Strübing, J. (2008). Pragmatismus als epistemische Praxis. Der Beitrag der Grounded Theory zur Empirie-Theorie-Frage [Pragmatism as epistemic practice. Grounded theory’s contribution to the empiricism-theory-question]. In H. Kalthoff, S. Hirschauer, & G. Lindemann (Eds.), Theoretische Empirie: Zur Relevanz qualitativer Forschung [Theoretical empiricism: The relevance of qualitative research] (pp. 279–311). Frankfurt, Germany: Suhrkamp.
   Google Scholar
• Twigg, J. (2004). The body, gender and age: Feminist insights in social gerontology. Journal of Aging Studies, 18(1), 59–73. doi: 10.1016/j.jaging.2003.09.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• United Nations. (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities-2.html
   Google Scholar