书评:护理危机:是什么造成的,我们如何结束它?

IF 1 4区 经济学 Q3 ECONOMICS Review of Radical Political Economics Pub Date : 2023-01-13 DOI:10.1177/04866134221142084
Daniel Hinze
{"title":"书评:护理危机:是什么造成的,我们如何结束它?","authors":"Daniel Hinze","doi":"10.1177/04866134221142084","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This book examines the state of the British health and social care system in the age of fiscal austerity. In her kaleidoscopic analysis, Dowling situates the decline of care within the larger context of the even further neoliberal reorientation of the UK government after the 2008 financial crisis. The author paints a vivid picture, replete with a plethora of statistics of the deteriorating state of UK public care. Dowling chronicles the long-standing commitment by successive UK governments of all stripes to increase the role of private business in the care sector on the unproven assumption that the profit motive would improve efficiency and quality beyond what government managers could achieve. Oftentimes private business has indeed achieved cost reductions—although not through better management but through reductions in the number of workers and a more thorough exploitation of the remaining labor force, leading to a reduction in the quality of care, overworked and underpaid staff, and, consequently, recruitment problems. The discussion of UK public care is set in the context of care as an affective, personal relationship between caregiver and care recipient and the class, gender, and racial dimensions of care work. In the United Kingdom, the privatization of large parts of the social care system in particular has led to deteriorating working conditions and precarity for care workers—mainly women and minorities—with low pay and zero-hour contracts. Care in all its manifestations is essential for the social reproduction of (capitalist) society. Within the family it is unseen, unremunerated, and still predominantly women’s responsibility, unless child care and household maintenance are “outsourced.” Then it tends to become the underpaid task of minority and poor women, who also predominate in the home care and care home sector. For Dowling, “ending the care crisis will require a profound shift in mentalities.. . . It does mean giving care a prominent place as a structural condition of our lives.. . . Some kind of ‘we’ built on inclusive solidarity is necessary to achieve change” (206). The key requirements she sets out are as follows:","PeriodicalId":46719,"journal":{"name":"Review of Radical Political Economics","volume":"26 1","pages":"353 - 355"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Book Review: The Care Crisis: What Caused It and How Can We End It?\",\"authors\":\"Daniel Hinze\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/04866134221142084\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This book examines the state of the British health and social care system in the age of fiscal austerity. In her kaleidoscopic analysis, Dowling situates the decline of care within the larger context of the even further neoliberal reorientation of the UK government after the 2008 financial crisis. The author paints a vivid picture, replete with a plethora of statistics of the deteriorating state of UK public care. Dowling chronicles the long-standing commitment by successive UK governments of all stripes to increase the role of private business in the care sector on the unproven assumption that the profit motive would improve efficiency and quality beyond what government managers could achieve. Oftentimes private business has indeed achieved cost reductions—although not through better management but through reductions in the number of workers and a more thorough exploitation of the remaining labor force, leading to a reduction in the quality of care, overworked and underpaid staff, and, consequently, recruitment problems. The discussion of UK public care is set in the context of care as an affective, personal relationship between caregiver and care recipient and the class, gender, and racial dimensions of care work. In the United Kingdom, the privatization of large parts of the social care system in particular has led to deteriorating working conditions and precarity for care workers—mainly women and minorities—with low pay and zero-hour contracts. Care in all its manifestations is essential for the social reproduction of (capitalist) society. Within the family it is unseen, unremunerated, and still predominantly women’s responsibility, unless child care and household maintenance are “outsourced.” Then it tends to become the underpaid task of minority and poor women, who also predominate in the home care and care home sector. For Dowling, “ending the care crisis will require a profound shift in mentalities.. . . It does mean giving care a prominent place as a structural condition of our lives.. . . Some kind of ‘we’ built on inclusive solidarity is necessary to achieve change” (206). The key requirements she sets out are as follows:\",\"PeriodicalId\":46719,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Review of Radical Political Economics\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"353 - 355\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Review of Radical Political Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/04866134221142084\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Radical Political Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/04866134221142084","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这本书考察了财政紧缩时代英国卫生和社会保健系统的状况。在她千变万化的分析中,道林将护理的减少置于2008年金融危机后英国政府进一步的新自由主义重新定位的更大背景下。作者描绘了一幅生动的画面,其中充满了大量关于英国公共医疗状况恶化的统计数据。道林记录了历届英国政府长期以来的承诺,即增加私营企业在护理行业的作用,这是基于一个未经证实的假设,即利润动机将提高效率和质量,超出政府管理者的能力。通常情况下,私营企业确实实现了成本的降低——尽管不是通过更好的管理,而是通过减少工人数量和对剩余劳动力的更彻底的剥削,导致护理质量下降,员工过度劳累和工资过低,从而导致招聘问题。关于英国公共护理的讨论是在护理的背景下进行的,作为护理者和护理接受者之间的情感,个人关系以及护理工作的阶级,性别和种族维度。在英国,特别是大部分社会护理系统的私有化导致了护理工作者(主要是妇女和少数民族)的工作条件恶化和不稳定,工资低,零时合同。一切形式的关怀对于(资本主义)社会的再生产都是必不可少的。在家庭中,这是看不见的,没有报酬的,而且仍然主要是妇女的责任,除非儿童保育和家庭维护被“外包”。然后,它往往成为少数民族和贫穷妇女的报酬微薄的任务,她们也在家庭护理和家庭护理部门占主导地位。对于道林来说,“结束护理危机需要心态的深刻转变.. ..它确实意味着给予关怀一个突出的位置,作为我们生活的一个结构条件.. ..实现变革需要建立在包容性团结基础上的某种‘我们’”(206)。她列出的主要要求如下:
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Book Review: The Care Crisis: What Caused It and How Can We End It?
This book examines the state of the British health and social care system in the age of fiscal austerity. In her kaleidoscopic analysis, Dowling situates the decline of care within the larger context of the even further neoliberal reorientation of the UK government after the 2008 financial crisis. The author paints a vivid picture, replete with a plethora of statistics of the deteriorating state of UK public care. Dowling chronicles the long-standing commitment by successive UK governments of all stripes to increase the role of private business in the care sector on the unproven assumption that the profit motive would improve efficiency and quality beyond what government managers could achieve. Oftentimes private business has indeed achieved cost reductions—although not through better management but through reductions in the number of workers and a more thorough exploitation of the remaining labor force, leading to a reduction in the quality of care, overworked and underpaid staff, and, consequently, recruitment problems. The discussion of UK public care is set in the context of care as an affective, personal relationship between caregiver and care recipient and the class, gender, and racial dimensions of care work. In the United Kingdom, the privatization of large parts of the social care system in particular has led to deteriorating working conditions and precarity for care workers—mainly women and minorities—with low pay and zero-hour contracts. Care in all its manifestations is essential for the social reproduction of (capitalist) society. Within the family it is unseen, unremunerated, and still predominantly women’s responsibility, unless child care and household maintenance are “outsourced.” Then it tends to become the underpaid task of minority and poor women, who also predominate in the home care and care home sector. For Dowling, “ending the care crisis will require a profound shift in mentalities.. . . It does mean giving care a prominent place as a structural condition of our lives.. . . Some kind of ‘we’ built on inclusive solidarity is necessary to achieve change” (206). The key requirements she sets out are as follows:
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
7.70%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: The Review of Radical Political Economics (RRPE) promotes critical inquiry into all areas of economic, social, and political reality. As the journal of the Union for Radical Political Economics, RRPE publishes innovative research in political economy broadly defined including, but not confined to, Marxian economies, post-Keynesian economics, Sraffian economics, feminist economics, and radical institutional economics. We are actively seeking submissions concerned with policy, history of thought, and economics and the environment. RRPE reflects an interdisciplinary approach to the study, development, and application of radical political economic analysis to social problems.
期刊最新文献
Sovereign Credit Rating: Impact on Social Investment and Role in Financial Subordination From a Spoke to a Hub: The Case of South Korea Debate as a Pedagogical Tool for Pluralist Economics Education Abstracts Chinese September 2024 Abstracts Spanish September 2024
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1