Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 32
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Holloway, Mark and Fyson, Rachel 2016. Acquired Brain Injury, Social Work and the Challenges of Personalisation: Table 1. British Journal of Social Work, Vol. 46, Issue. 5, p. 1301.

    Houston, Stan 2016. Beyond Individualism: Social Work and Social Identity. British Journal of Social Work, Vol. 46, Issue. 2, p. 532.

    Robinson, Sally Fisher, Karen R. and Gendera, Sandra 2016. Can Case Management Contribute to Effective Use of Small Self-Directed Support Packages for People with Disabilities?. Asian Social Work and Policy Review,

    Winter, Karen and Cree, Viviene E. 2016. Social Work Home Visits to Children and Families in the UK: A Foucauldian Perspective. British Journal of Social Work, Vol. 46, Issue. 5, p. 1175.

    Mladenov, Teodor 2015. Neoliberalism, postsocialism, disability. Disability & Society, Vol. 30, Issue. 3, p. 445.

    Needham, Catherine 2015. The Spaces of Personalisation: Place and Distance in Caring Labour. Social Policy and Society, Vol. 14, Issue. 03, p. 357.

    Needham, Catherine and Glasby, Jon 2015. Personalisation – love it or hate it?. Journal of Integrated Care, Vol. 23, Issue. 5, p. 268.

    Stevens, Martin 2015. Commentary on “Assisting individuals ageing with learning disability: support worker perspectives”. Tizard Learning Disability Review, Vol. 20, Issue. 4, p. 223.

    Trappenburg, M. J. 2015. Active Solidarity and Its Discontents. Health Care Analysis, Vol. 23, Issue. 3, p. 207.

    Harkes, Mary A. Brown, Michael and Horsburgh, Dorothy 2014. Self-directed support policy: challenges and possible solutions. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 42, Issue. 3, p. 169.

    Holloway, Mark 2014. How is ABI assessed and responded to in non-specialist settings? Is specialist education required for all social care professionals?. Social Care and Neurodisability, Vol. 5, Issue. 4, p. 201.

    Hujala, Anneli Laulainen, Sanna Lindberg, Kajsa Thomas, Will and Hollinrake, Sue 2014. Economic and demographic challenges for social care. Journal of Health Organization and Management, Vol. 28, Issue. 5, p. 653.

    Junne, Jaromir and Huber, Christian 2014. The risk of users’ choice: exploring the case of direct payments in German social care. Health, Risk & Society, Vol. 16, Issue. 7-8, p. 631.

    Kendall, Sophie and Cameron, Ailsa 2014. Personalisation of adult social care: self-directed support and the choice and control agenda. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 42, Issue. 4, p. 264.

    Lymbery, M. 2014. Social Work and Personalisation: Fracturing the Bureau-Professional Compact?. British Journal of Social Work, Vol. 44, Issue. 4, p. 795.

    POWER, ANDREW 2014. Personalisation and Austerity in the Crosshairs: Government Perspectives on the Remaking of Adult Social Care. Journal of Social Policy, Vol. 43, Issue. 04, p. 829.

    Cash, Belinda Hodgkin, Suzanne and Warburton, Jeni 2013. Till Death Us Do Part? A Critical Analysis of Obligation and Choice for Spousal Caregivers. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, Vol. 56, Issue. 8, p. 657.

    Dodd, Steven 2013. Personalisation, individualism and the politics of disablement. Disability & Society, Vol. 28, Issue. 2, p. 260.

    Needham, Catherine 2013. Personalized commissioning, public spaces: the limits of the market in English social care services. BMC Health Services Research, Vol. 13, Issue. S1,

    Power, Andrew 2013. Care in everyday life:an ethic of care in practice. Disability & Society, Vol. 28, Issue. 8, p. 1176.


Neo-Liberal Individualism or Self-Directed Support: Are We All Speaking the Same Language on Modernising Adult Social Care?

  • Alan Roulstone (a1) and Hannah Morgan (a2)
  • DOI:
  • Published online: 01 July 2009

This article explores recent developments in the modernisation of adult social care through the lens of changes to English day services. Drawing on wider policy debates, it argues that Disabled Peoples' Movement and governmental ideas on self-directed support, although superficially similar, are growing increasingly apart. It is argued that in the absence of adequate funding and exposure to organisations of disabled people, day service recipients risk moving from a position of enforced collectivism to an enforced individualism characteristic of neo-liberal constructions of economic life.

Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

H. Dean (2007), ‘The ethics of welfare-to-work’, Policy and Politics, 35, 4, 573–90.

J. Glasby (2005), ‘Direct payments and the social model of disability’, Social Work and Social Science Review, 12, 2, 4858.

M. Oliver (1990), Politics of Disablement, Basingstoke: Macmillan.

M. Oliver and C. Barnes (2008), ‘Talking about us without us? A response to Neil Crowther’, Disability and Society, 23, 4, 397–399.

A. Roulstone (2000), ‘Disability, dependency and the new deal for disabled people’, Disability and Society, 15, 3, 427–43.

B. Sapey and J. Pearson (2004), ‘Do disabled people need social workers?’, Social Work and Social Science Review, 11, 3, 5270.

V. Williams and A. Holman (1993), ‘“It's about your life”: people with learning difficulties and direct payments’, in J. Bornat , J. Johnson , C. Pereira , D. Pilgrim and F. Williams (eds.), Community Care: A Reader, 2nd edn, London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Social Policy and Society
  • ISSN: 1474-7464
  • EISSN: 1475-3073
  • URL: /core/journals/social-policy-and-society
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *