Ambivalences of Inclusion in Society and Social Work: Research-Based Reflections in Four European Countries [1st ed.] 9783030554453, 9783030554460

Citation preview

European Social Work Education and Practice

Stephan Bundschuh Maria José Freitas Càndid Palacín Bartrolí Nino Žganec Editors

Ambivalences of Inclusion in Society and Social Work Research-Based Reflections in Four European Countries

European Social Work Education and Practice Series Editors Nino Žganec, Department of Social Work, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia Marion Laging, Faculty of Social Work, Health Care, Esslingen University of Applied Sciences, Esslingen am Neckar, Baden-Württemberg, Germany

European Association of Schools of Social Work

European Social Work Education and Practice is a Series developed within the frame of the contributions of the European Association of Schools of Social Work (EASSW) on the current developments of social work education and its links to the practice of social work in a European context. The Series supports the international dialogue among social work academics, practitioners, service users, and decisionmakers. The aim of the Series is to provide a platform for identification and discussion of various challenges and developments within European social work. Similar to other professions, social work also is constantly contending with new demands regarding changing fields of work, new financial models, rising competition among the institutions, new groups and types of service users, and many other challenges. All of these circumstances require professionals to be well prepared and to provide new responses on how to work in the context of globalization and neoliberalism while adhering to the principles of solidarity, social justice, and humanity. More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/16359

Stephan Bundschuh  •  Maria José Freitas Càndid Palacín Bartrolí  •  Nino Žganec Editors

Ambivalences of Inclusion in Society and Social Work Research-Based Reflections in Four European Countries

Editors Stephan Bundschuh Faculty of Social Sciences Koblenz University of Applied Sciences Koblenz, Germany Càndid Palacín Bartrolí Faculty of Education University of Barcelona Barcelona, Spain

Maria José Freitas Zuyd University of Applied Sciences Social Studies Academy Sittard, The Netherlands Nino Žganec Department of Social Work Faculty of Law University of Zagreb Zagreb, Croatia

ISSN 2662-2440     ISSN 2662-2459 (electronic) European Social Work Education and Practice ISBN 978-3-030-55445-3    ISBN 978-3-030-55446-0 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55446-0 © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

Foreword

When the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN CRPD) in 2006, European Union member states began a ratification process which, almost 15 years on, is not yet complete. In the Netherlands, for example, the convention was only ratified in 2016. The UN CRPD aims to reduce the obstacles faced by people with disabilities when participating in society; this means, among other things, ensuring that those with disabilities are not discriminated against and enabling them to participate in societies which are based on equality. It also means making it possible for people with disabilities to actively participate in various important aspects of daily life, such as work, education, housing, social services, health care and transport, as well as sports, cultural and leisure activities. This goal can only be achieved if the target group is involved in its realisation. For the UN CRPD to be effective, input from experts is essential; hence, one of the convention’s main principles is to involve people with disabilities from the outset when developing and implementing inclusive policies. Furthermore, a broad spectrum of disabilities must be taken into account as, for instance, wheelchair users experience very different challenges to people with visual impairments. Since the UN CRPD was created, there have been many social changes and the world has moved on. Internationalisation and globalisation have blurred the national boundaries on which many welfare states were built. Identities have become fluid and plural, and fixed structures and institutions have been replaced by networks and drop-down menus. A culture of emotions and experiences has become increasingly dominant and significant in everyday life, as opposed to rationally substantiated reasoning. The key terms here are multi-option society, Erlebnisgesellschaft or staccato culture. In Europe, ageing populations and social decline, diverse family structures, increasing multiculturalism and the digital revolution have led to changes in society. Such transformations, however, have also had repercussions and led to counteractions. Alongside increased internationalisation and diversity, there has also been a rise in neo-nationalism and an emphasis on national cultures and identities. Whilst the world has changed since 2006 and the inclusion principle has expanded as a result of the aforementioned developments, the relevance and ­rationale of inclusion remain the same. European societies now consider people v

vi

Foreword

with disabilities in terms of diversity; this new perspective on inclusion also refers to differences in terms of cultural and ethnic background, access to economic resources, sexual orientation and religious and political beliefs. Such differences may determine an individual’s access to the labour and housing market, their right to political participation and influence and their inclusion in various social contexts. In other words, from a diversity perspective, inclusion focuses on ensuring that people from all backgrounds and with a diverse range of capabilities have access to and are represented within significant domains, such as the economy, politics and social life. The UN CRPD could have been written by a social worker: supporting and improving the situations of people on the sidelines of society through casework and community work is, after all, a key task of the social work profession. Likewise, developing inclusion strategies by involving people with disabilities and those with hands-on experience of supporting them is central to social work. Casework is used to support individual clients with the aim of expanding their skills and capabilities and empowering them. Community work, however, focuses on organising society in a way that gives shape and substance to diversity. In short, equipping clients for successful inclusion (through casework) and opening up society to them (through community work) is the core business of social work. The social work profession is normative and contextually bound, and such normative interventions are appropriate in the environment in which they take place. Whilst practice-based learning plays a central role, this does not simply evolve; it requires explanation and analysis, as well as dialogue and discussion on the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and limitations of a chosen intervention or strategy. Hence, practice-based learning arises from critical reflection on practical action in a way that is negotiable and transparent. In terms of diversity and inclusion, this means providing insights into and reflecting on interventions and strategies in these fields. This is an explicit task of social work research as it is only through such research that we can gain clarity about which interventions are useful and which are not. In summer 2015, Günter Friesenhahn (Koblenz), Josefina Fernández Barrera (Barcelona), Nino Žganec (Zagreb) and Maria José Freitas (Maastricht) met at the European Association of Schools of Social Work (EASSW) Conference in Milan to discuss a potential collaboration on comparative research. These four academics were all connected to research centres in their social work faculties and shared common research interests. In spring 2016, the group met again in Maastricht with a twofold aim: to share information about current research in their respective faculties and to determine a common theme for comparative research. That theme became inclusion and the European Research Network on Inclusive Society and Social Work was born. The network’s initial aim was to bring together their first findings or publication in 2017. However, it quickly became clear that this was not feasible and that there were many complex challenges to overcome: working in four languages and communicating in a fifth—English, varying research approaches and backgrounds, ­distinct writing styles, divergent work schedules and, finally, different areas of

Foreword

vii

research at each of the four research centres. Bringing together this diversity of forms, content and mindsets involved a great deal of time and dialogue. These discussions were certainly not a waste of time: the mutual exchange of ideas led to a broadening of knowledge, greater insights into inclusion practices in other countries and a deeper understanding of developments in our own research. Taking note of the variety of social work research practices, approaches and interpretations in relation to inclusion, and considering differing approaches to client participation, provided food for thought and awakened curiosity. This created a mirror that reflected each researcher’s own perceived reality and intensified their insight into their own (research) practice. Be curious and reflect: this book is the impressive and enlightening result of this valuable exercise. Zuyd University of Applied Sciences  Nol Reverda Maastricht, The Netherlands

Acknowledgements

We wish to thank various people and organisations for their contribution to the publication of this book. Thanks to: European Association of Schools of Social Work (EASSW) for giving us the opportunity to publish this book as part of their European Social Work Education and Practice series, Janet Kim and the Springer editorial team for their valuable and reliable support throughout the publication process, Koblenz University of Applied Sciences for funding the editing process, Esra Herzog and Jana Kluge-Wirz for supporting the production process and Mia Eger for editing our chapters with precision and patience. Special thanks to the higher education institutions which helped to bring this transnational publication to fruition through their long-term commitment: Faculty of Social Sciences at Koblenz University of Applied Sciences, Academy of Social Studies at Zuyd University of Applied Sciences, Social Work Education and Research Unit at University of Barcelona and Department of Social Work at University of Zagreb. Without their support, this book would not have been possible.

ix

Participating Institutes and Research Groups

 esearch Group on Social Integration (Lectoraat Sociale R Integratie), Academy of Social Studies, Zuyd University of Applied Sciences, The Netherlands The Research Group on Social Integration (Lectoraat Sociale Integratie) is part of the Academy of Social Studies at Zuyd University of Applied Sciences in Sittard. The group’s core task is to conduct practice-based research on issues that affect the social functioning of citizens in society; these include poverty, mental health, physical disabilities, unemployment, addiction and community development. This research provides insights into forms of vulnerability and how social professionals address and contribute to citizens’ well-being. The Research Group carries out both commissioned and independent research in cooperation with diverse knowledge partners, including academic institutions and social work organisations. Over the years, the Research Group on Social Integration has made a significant contribution to the research skills and culture at Zuyd University of Applied Sciences, particularly within the Academy of Social Studies. Research in the Academy has focused on curriculum development and professional development for academic staff in relation to social work research. The Academy of Social Studies runs a four-year Bachelor’s programme in Social Work; in 2019/2020, approximately 700 full-time students were enrolled in the programme, which covers all areas of social work practice. Teaching and learning take place in a mix of settings, including (virtual) classrooms, supervision, internships in local social work organisations and practice-oriented (research) studies. Social work students have the opportunity to work with children and adults, including the elderly, with the aim of enabling them to learn to address the needs of a diversity of people. In a professional context, students gain experience of supporting vulnerable people in challenging situations and helping them to take control of their lives. In the final 2 years of the social work programme, students have the opportunity to focus on youth welfare, mental health, disability support or community work.

xi

xii

Participating Institutes and Research Groups

 esearch and Innovation Group in Social Work (GRITS), R Faculty of Education, University of Barcelona, Spain The Research and Innovation Group in Social Work (GRITS) was created under the umbrella of the Social Work Department at the University of Barcelona. The group’s aim is to improve social work research practices and strengthen the theoretical framework based on research and innovative practices. Furthermore, GRITS aims to provide social workers with the tools to improve their professional practice, as well as to provide future social professionals with a theoretical and practical perspective for reflective practice based on scientific knowledge. One of the challenges in this endeavour is the need to continuously adapt social work to dynamic contexts due to the changing social phenomena and approaches which shape the intervention framework. In 2009, GRITS was accredited as a consolidated research group by AGAUR, the Government of Catalonia research agency. The group has carried out national and international research in several fields including: social work with families in a range of contexts and social groups, social work methods and theories, collaborative research, intervention with families, homeless women, children at risk, older lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people and the self-determination of vulnerable groups. GRITS is currently developing research in the following areas: • Research and development: unaccompanied migrant minors (MMNA) in Spain; • Rethinking family participation: diagnosis and intervention proposals in social services primary care in Barcelona; • LGBT refugees and cross-border research.

 epartment of Social Work, Faculty of Law, University D of Zagreb, Croatia The Department of Social Work is one of the two departments in the Faculty of Law; the second is the Department of Public Administration and Public Finance. There are two institutes within the Department of Social Work. The Institute for Social Work comprises the following professorial chairs: Social Work Theory and Methods, Methodology in Social Sciences, Social Gerontology and Specialised Fields of Social Work. The Institute for Social Policy consists of professorial chairs in Psychology and Social Policy. Teaching is primarily organised according to these chairs and is coordinated at both institute and faculty levels. Academic research is not generally dependent on this organisational structure and researchers have the freedom to form research teams based on their research interests and current projects; thus, research teams differ from project to project. Each Institute produces an important journal: the Annual of Social Work (Ljetopis socijalnog rada) is published

Participating Institutes and Research Groups

xiii

by the Institute for Social Work and The Croatian Journal of Social Policy (Revija za socijalnu politiku) by the Institute for Social Policy. The Department of Social Work offers the following study programmes: Bachelor’s and Master’s in Social Work, Master’s in Social Policy and doctoral programmes in Social Work and Social Policy. The department also offers the following specialised postgraduate programmes: Psychosocial Approach in Social Work, Psychosocial Approach in Social Policy, Supervision in Psychosocial Work, Family Mediation and Social Work and Community Development.

I nstitute of Research and Further Education, Faculty of Social Sciences, Koblenz University of Applied Sciences, Germany The Institute of Research and Further Education (IFW) is part of the Faculty of Social Sciences at Koblenz University of Applied Sciences. The institute initiates and supports research and academic further education programmes in social work and educational fields. The IFW • develops research in social sciences based on current theoretical knowledge and empirical methods; • has extensive experience of conception and implementation of projects and evaluations; • conceptualises continuing academic education programmes to provide social work professionals with reflective further education. In this way, the IFW fulfils its role as an interface for transferring knowledge between academic research and practice. As part of the Faculty of Social Sciences, the institute is also able to share knowledge and provide input for the diverse range of degree programmes in the faculty; these include Social Work, Early Childhood Studies, Early Childhood Education and Education and Social Management. The research and further education programmes focus on social inequality, social policy, welfare organisations and intermediary bodies, as well as health, child and youth services, migration, anti-racism and transnationalism in relation to social work.

Contents

1 Introduction����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������    1 Càndid Palacín Bartrolí, Josep María Mesquida González, María Virginia Matulic Domandzic, Ariadna Munté Pascual, and Irene de Vicente Zueras 2 Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Netherlands ��������������������������   13 Maria José Freitas, Jhoy Dassen, Samira Louali, Marijke Sniekers, Chantal van Lieshout, and Carin Wevers 3 Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Spanish Case ������������������������   43 Càndid Palacín Bartrolí, Josep María Mesquida González, Josefina Fernández Barrera, María Virginia Matulic Domandzic, Ariadna Munté Pascual, and Irene de Vicente Zueras 4 Inclusive Society Within the Framework of a Transitioning Society: Examples from the Republic of Croatia������������������������������������������������   73 Nino Žganec and Ana Opačić 5 Social Work and Inclusive Society in Germany������������������������������������   97 Stephan Bundschuh, Ines Arendt, Marion Felder, Robert Frietsch, Esra Herzog, Nadja Högner, Dirk Holbach, Jana Kluge-Wirz, Martin Schmid, and Katrin Schneiders 6 The Ambivalences of Inclusion in Society and Social Work: A Country Comparison ��������������������������������������������������������������������������  133 Stephan Bundschuh Country-Specific Concepts and Laws������������������������������������������������������������  151 Index������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  157

xv

List of Figures

Fig. 2.1

The Care Pyramid. Published with permission from Bohn Stafleu van Loghum (Sprinkhuizen & Scholte, 2012)���������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 19

Fig. 4.1

The structure of social care homes, and the number of residents 2004–2017. (Source: Ministry of Demographics, Family, Youth and Social Policy, 2018) ���������������������������������������������� 88 The structure of social care homes, and the number of residents and employees 2004–2017. (Source: Ministry of Demographics, Family, Youth and Social Policy, 2018)���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 89

Fig. 4.2

Fig. 5.1

Symptomatic homelessness amongst under-25s (Frietsch & Holbach, 2016, p. 22) ���������������������������������������������������� 106

xvii

List of Tables

Table 4.1 Residents newly placed in foster families and social care homes 2012–2016 ���������������������������������������������������������������������� 89 Table 5.1 Description of study participants������������������������������������������������������ 109 Table 5.2 Exclusion factors affecting older substance users (n = 62)�������������� 110

xix

About the Editors

Stephan Bundschuh  is Professor of Child and Youth Services in the Faculty of Social Sciences, Koblenz University of Applied Sciences. He is also director of the faculty’s Institute of Research and Further Education (IFW). After studying Philosophy, Social Sciences and History, he went on to complete his PhD in Social Philosophy. He worked in the field of political education for several years, including as Managing Director of an anti-racism centre focused on providing information and further education. His academic teaching and research interests include authoritarian tendencies, anti-racist behaviour and educational processes in relation to young people, as well as the role of child and youth services in (post-)migrant societies. His most recent research focuses on inclusion, awareness of racism in childcare centres and remembrance education in youth work. Maria José Freitas  is a researcher and lecturer at the Academy of Social Studies, Zuyd University of Applied Sciences, where she conducts research on a range of social integration issues. She also teaches social work research skills to new students and guides final-year social work students through their Bachelor’s research projects. She has worked in the field of social work education for many years and has a particular affinity to a transnational European perspective. Since the start of her career at the European Centre for Work and Society in Maastricht, she has been committed to promoting social work education and research from a European perspective. This European mindset continued in her work as a lecturer on the transnational Comparative European Social Studies Master’s programme (MACESS) and as a key member of the European Platform for Worldwide Social Work (EUSW) Thematic Network project. Càndid Palacín Bartrolí  is a professor and researcher in the Social Work Training and Research Section (UFR) at the University of Barcelona. He has a doctorate from the University of Barcelona and is a member of the university’s Research and xxi

xxii

About the Editors

Innovation Group in Social Work (GRITS). He also teaches on the Master’s in Medical Social Work at the Open University of Catalonia (UOC). He is a social worker, psychologist and psychotherapist, a member of the School of Clinical Psychoanalysis for Children and Adolescents (ECPNA) and a contributor to the UMBRAL psychological assistance network. He has worked for a trade union, a third sector organisation and in the public sector and is particularly ­dedicated to migration issues. He has published widely on social work, migration and social intervention models. His current research focuses on unaccompanied migrant minors and social work with families. Nino Žganec  is Professor of Social Work Theory and Methods in the Department of Social Work, Faculty of Law, University of Zagreb. He completed his studies in this faculty and has worked there throughout his career—as an assistant professor, associate professor and now full professor. His practical and research interests include community social work, ethics and human rights, the organisation of social services and international social work. He has published widely in Croatian and international journals and books, participated in several national and international research projects and is a keynote speaker at social work conferences in Croatia and around the world. He is also an experienced policymaker and served as Assistant Minister and then as State Secretary in the Croatian Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare (2000–2005). During his term in office, comprehensive reforms of the social care sector were launched. Since 2011, he has been a member of the executive committee of the European Association of Schools of Social Work (EASSW) and was president of the association (2015–2019). During this period, he was also vice-president of the International Association of Schools of Social work (IASSW). He was a member of the executive committee of the European Anti-Poverty Network (EAPN) and president of the Croatian Anti-Poverty Network (2014–2020). He lectures on graduate and postgraduate programmes, including PhD programmes, in several European countries.

Contributors

Ines Arendt  Faculty of Social Sciences, Koblenz University of Applied Sciences, Koblenz, Germany Stephan Bundschuh  Faculty of Social Sciences, Koblenz University of Applied Sciences, Koblenz, Germany Jhoy  Dassen  Zuyd University of Applied Sciences, Social Studies Academy, Sittard, The Netherlands Marion  Felder  Faculty of Social Sciences, Koblenz University of Applied Sciences, Koblenz, Germany Josefina  Fernández  Barrera  Faculty of Education, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain Maria José Freitas  Zuyd University of Applied Sciences, Social Studies Academy, Sittard, The Netherlands Robert  Frietsch  Faculty of Social Sciences, Koblenz University of Applied Sciences, Koblenz, Germany Esra Herzog  Faculty of Social Sciences, Koblenz University of Applied Sciences, Koblenz, Germany Nadja Högner  Special Education Teacher, Berlin, Germany Dirk Holbach  Faculty of Social Sciences, Koblenz University of Applied Sciences, Koblenz, Germany Jana  Kluge-Wirz  Faculty of Social Sciences, Koblenz University of Applied Sciences, Koblenz, Germany Chantal  van Lieshout  Zuyd University of Applied Sciences, Social Studies Academy, Sittard, The Netherlands Samira  Louali  Zuyd University of Applied Sciences, Social Studies Academy, Sittard, The Netherlands xxiii

xxiv

Contributors

María  Virginia  Matulic  Domandzic  Faculty of Education, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain Josep María Mesquida González  Faculty of Education, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain Ariadna Munté Pascual  Faculty of Education, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain Ana Opačić  Department of Social Work, Faculty of Law, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia Càndid  Palacín  Bartrolí  Faculty of Education, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain Martin  Schmid  Faculty of Social Sciences, Koblenz University of Applied Sciences, Koblenz, Germany Katrin  Schneiders  Faculty of Social Sciences, Koblenz University of Applied Sciences, Koblenz, Germany Marijke Sniekers  Zuyd University of Applied Sciences, Social Studies Academy, Sittard, The Netherlands Irene de Vicente Zueras  Faculty of Education, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain Carin  Wevers Zuyd University of Applied Sciences, Social Studies Academy, Sittard, The Netherlands Nino Žganec  Department of Social Work, Faculty of Law, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia

Chapter 1

Introduction Càndid Palacín Bartrolí, Josep María Mesquida González, María Virginia Matulic Domandzic, Ariadna Munté Pascual, and Irene de Vicente Zueras

1.1  How This Project Emerged Like many transnational endeavours, the idea for this book came to life during a series of coffee-break conversations at an international meeting—the European Association of Schools of Social Work (EASSW) conference from 29th June to 2nd July 2015 in Milan. These conversations continued long after the event and eventually crystallised into a decision to carry out collaborative research involving four EASSW members, each from different research departments at faculties of social work in four different European countries. The country chapters on inclusive society in the Netherlands, Spain, Croatia and Germany were written independently by each research team. To ensure that we maintained the transnational character of our research as it progressed, meetings were held at each of the partner institutions. At our first meeting in Maastricht in March 2016, we focused on ensuring the commitment of the four partners and exploring social work research topics of common interest. This was followed by a meeting in Zagreb in November 2016 to narrow the focus of the topic and frame the writing approach. After a period of writing and editing, the partners met again in January 2018, this time in Barcelona, to present their draft country chapters. Our final meetings, held in Koblenz in October 2018 and May 2019, involved presenting and fine-tuning the results of the collaborative process, which resulted in this book.

C. Palacín Bartrolí · J. M. Mesquida González (*) · M. V. Matulic Domandzic A. Munté Pascual · I. de Vicente Zueras Faculty of Education, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 S. Bundschuh et al. (eds.), Ambivalences of Inclusion in Society and Social Work, European Social Work Education and Practice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55446-0_1

1

2

C. Palacín Bartrolí et al.

1.2  I nclusive Society: Relevant Concepts in Relation to Social Work Inclusive society is the unifying concept in this book, and it is discussed in relation to the development of our work and to other relevant concepts. The Dutch research (Chap. 2) describes a shift in discourse from integration to inclusion; at a legislative level, there is a move from centralised to decentralised social care provision linked to the idea of participation. This issue has given rise to discussions; whilst advocates of these changes see them as a step towards a greater activation and participation of citizens, critics regard them as an abandonment of the most vulnerable groups in society (Koster, 2014). The Dutch research examples reveal participation paradoxes in relation to concepts such as exclusion, distance between policymakers and citizens, bottom-up processes, and practices derived from (new or untested) policies. From the perspective of the Spanish research (Chap. 3), the idea of inclusive society cannot be separated from the notion of social inequality as exclusion is the result of that inequality (Subirats, 2004). Furthermore, it is exacerbated by failures in social policy and welfare infrastructure with regard to the issues that affect the groups studied in the research—Roma migrant women, homeless people, migrants and older gay men. In Spain, the public sector’s insufficient response to the problems faced by these groups has led to the emergence of social initiatives in the third sector; these provide mediation, support, proximity and transformative activism for the aforementioned groups. The third sector comprises private organisations which support collective welfare; it hence functions as an intermediary in relation to the public (first) sector and private (second) sector. Godàs (2004) developed a series of four characteristics to identify social movements, which represent aspects of citizens’ social and cultural rights, and which should be considered requirements for third sector organisations. According to Godàs (2004), such organisations should have a fully democratic political orientation; they should aim to limit or neutralise power relationships by facilitating the universal improvement of society; the acknowledgement of individuals as autonomous beings with the right to associate with others should be a guiding principle; and they should follow secular principles to facilitate participation (p. 25–26). The Croatian research (Chap. 4) highlights the inadequate implementation of the notion of inclusive society and raises questions about the interpretation of this concept in Croatia. Inclusion is considered in wider terms in relation to its implications for people with disabilities, its significance as a tool for reflecting on the deinstitutionalisation of social work and its impact on the implementation of an inclusive educational system (Bošković, Ilić-Stošović, & Skočić-Mihić, 2017). This deinstitutionalisation process is not, however, comparable to the decentralisation of social work described in the Dutch chapter. In Croatia, deinstitutionalisation is associated with a significant economic transition from a socialist legacy to a capitalist society. This transition not only led to a new economic model but also to a horizontal and decentralised welfare system. However, the incomplete nature of this transition has caused uncertainty, and frequent reforms and legislative changes

1 Introduction

3

have left social workers feeling insecure about their role. Furthermore, in Croatia, non-governmental entities are far less developed and play a less significant role than, for example, in Spain. In the German research (Chap. 5), the concept of inclusive society is linked to the notion of inclusion. The term inclusion is applied differently in a range of contexts, from Niklas Luhmann’s social systems theory, poverty studies and discourses on disability (especially in the field of education) to equality and discrimination in a (post-)migrant society, or as an alternative to or critique of integration. For instance, in the context of migration, the term integration could refer to the incorporation of someone from a different country or culture into a social group which is considered culturally homogeneous. In contrast to integration, inclusion connotes an individual belonging to multiple societal fields and, from a normative perspective, refers to equitable access to the welfare system. The concept of participation is also central to this book. In the Netherlands, participation has come to symbolise welfare reforms and a way of facilitating greater well-being for Dutch citizens. There is a link between participation in informal networks and citizens’ sense of self-reliance and autonomy. These aspects are equivalent to the concept of autonomy discussed in the Spanish chapter. In Germany, on the other hand, the notion of participation is linked to social support systems, which attempt to ensure equal opportunities for the social participation of vulnerable groups. In Spain, the lack of participation of some sections of society in social structures is linked to increasing inequality and the emergence of new social ruptures. In Croatia, participation is considered a nodular concept, which is rooted in a democratic society; interaction between individuals is regarded as a facilitating factor in learning and developing new competencies. Social inclusion is also a key theme throughout this book. In the German research, social inclusion is understood in relation to an opposition between inclusion and exclusion; the theoretical debate surrounding these opposing concepts is based on Luhmann (1997), with a particular focus on systems theory. An intersectional analysis (gender, ethnicity, status and body) replaces analysis based on isolated indicators. Whilst the Spanish research also addresses notions of inclusion/exclusion, these are explained in terms of trajectories in three different zones of social space: affiliation, vulnerability and disaffiliation (Castel, 1997); research subjects are considered to be influenced by their individual trajectories. The Dutch research refers to inclusion in relation to the participation society. The authors differentiate between integration, which is strongly associated with migration, and inclusive society, which relates to the idea of a society for all. Whilst integration can be seen as a way to enable fuller participation for newcomers in Dutch society, due to increasingly rigid legislation, it has led to restrictive, compulsory integration, which can also be seen as a way to curb migration. The Croatian research looks at the concept of inclusion in terms of inclusive education and deinstitutionalisation; it describes how institutional care is being replaced by community-based support. Alongside these concepts, changes in social work theory and practice are discussed and compared in relation to the research results and their implications. The Netherlands chapter proposes that the assumption of new roles addresses changing

4

C. Palacín Bartrolí et al.

mechanisms, especially when citizens—rather than public authorities—are considered responsible for organising care and support. In the case of Croatia, changing realities may require bottom-up initiatives, which are developed horizontally rather than vertically; with a focus on community development and users’ self-­management, such projects generally promote an inclusive perspective on social work. The Spanish chapter demonstrates the relevance of relational processes in professional intervention. This issue is framed by notions of proximity, trust and identification. The Barcelona team also identified the third or non-profit sector as a provider of care, reassurance, safety, benchmarking and collective interventions. The German chapter reflects on social work as a social institution, with methods ranging from case management to structural empowerment. The chapter discusses various tasks in primary and secondary prevention and intervention, such as awareness raising or providing support for marginalised individuals, families, groups and communities. These tasks are considered in relation to the challenge of balancing the opportunities and limitations of the social work profession with the interests of clients, as well as with administrative and legislative regulations. The research presented and discussed in this book suggests that social work is positioned between several binaries: between the social order defined by public administrations and the needs of service users, between control and social change, and between individuals and structures. The idea of inclusion or inclusive society is not fully realised in inclusive and participatory principles in social institutions, in specific social work fields or in daily life. Inclusive society should perhaps be understood in terms of Erik Olin Wright’s (2011) concept of a ‘real utopia’. Wright defines a real utopia as ‘actually existing social settings that violate the basic logics of dominant institutions in ways that embody emancipatory aspirations and prefigure broader utopian alternatives’ (Wright, 2011, p.  3). These new tendencies are based on solidarity; although they are not currently dominant in society, they are present in some organisations, cooperatives and projects.

1.3  Methodology Each of the research teams in the participating countries used different methodologies in their work. The four research projects discussed in the Dutch chapter explore the experiences of citizens (young mothers, elderly citizens and those in need of care) and social work professionals (in social district teams) at the time of legislative change. These research projects are empirical, in small settings and are based either on PhD research or commissioned research conducted between 2011 and 2019. The research relies on several methodologies, such as ethnography, action research and mixed methods; the corresponding data generation methods are applied, namely (participant) observation, interviews, focus groups and desk research. The purposive selection of informants, extensive researcher exposure and systematic research design provide trustworthy data leading to context-specific

1 Introduction

5

knowledge and the creation of research tools. In addition, all research examples adhere to the ethical research standards of Zuyd University of Applied Sciences. The research projects detailed in the Spanish chapter were undertaken by researchers linked to the Department of Social Work at the University of Barcelona. Based on PhD research completed between 2012 and 2017, the four projects focus on the following social groups in Barcelona: homeless people, migrants, older gay men and Roma migrant women. In most cases, a qualitative methodology was used; however, one project combined both qualitative and quantitative methods. The research on homelessness used the qualitative techniques of life stories and in-depth interviews; the research on migrants also used in-depth interviews, as well as case studies and discussion groups. The study of older gay men combined qualitative and quantitative procedures using surveys, discussion groups, participant observation, biographies and in-depth interviews. Finally, the project involving Roma migrant women used participant observation and life stories along with a focus group. These research projects had diverse theoretical frameworks and methodologies and involved different social groups. In order to manage data from various sources, the authors designed a category system as a common nexus that enabled them to work collaboratively. The Croatian chapter was developed through the analysis of empirical research practices which refer to the concept of inclusive society or inclusion. The authors analysed the following aspects of each piece of empirical research: the conceptual approach to inclusive society or inclusion, the current achievements of Croatia’s inclusive agenda and the obstacles faced with regard to pursuing an inclusive agenda in Croatia. The research team also uses examples from social work practice and statistical reports to support their arguments. Based on an inductive analysis of the empirical findings, the authors propose a broader meta-understanding of inclusive society and social work within the social processes taking place at both national and European levels. The chapter on Germany looks at examples of inclusion practices in three research-based projects and one practice-based project. The first project considers the psychosocial and health situation of young homeless people—specifically young women. The results of a survey on life orientation, which uses the SOC-29 (Sense of Coherence Scale) questionnaire, show the greater vulnerability of young homeless people compared with those without housing issues. The second project focuses on the exclusion and inclusion of older heroin users. The case management model was adapted to older substance users, and the research design combined qualitative interviews with experts in the field and standardised quantitative instruments to evaluate service users. The third project examines the inclusion of an increasing number of students with visual impairments and blindness in mainstream educational settings. Case studies were conducted to investigate why many of these students transfer to special schools. An online survey explored the conditions for blind and visually impaired students in mainstream classrooms in Berlin from the teachers’ perspective. The fourth practice-based project evaluates and reflects on an educational inclusion project focusing on vocational integration, social participation and reducing individual and institutional discrimination against young people

6

C. Palacín Bartrolí et al.

at one special school for pupils with learning difficulties. The research involved a quantitative evaluation of workshops for pupils and three qualitative interviews with young project participants. The project team’s reflections provide further insights into the challenges and constraints of this type of project work.

1.4  E  uropean Policy on Social Inclusion Strategies: A Brief Overview Since the end of the twentieth century, social inequality worldwide has become increasingly polarised (Esping-Andersen, 1999). In recent decades, poverty levels in OECD countries have increased, and the most vulnerable sectors of society are particularly at risk (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2008, 2011, 2015). This polarised situation is the result of neoliberal changes in Western countries throughout the 1970s, which greatly influenced employment, family models and social protection systems. These new forms of poverty are characteristic of post-industrial economies and most commonly affect disadvantaged and vulnerable groups, unemployed people and casual workers (the working poor) (Marí-Klose & Marí-Klose, 2013, p.  315). Whilst disadvantaged groups are already greatly impacted by unemployment, the vulnerability bracket is increasingly extending to other social groups. According to Castel (2010), this situation has led to a totalising representation of contemporary society as a risk society (p.  30). The failure of modern societies to enable integration in areas such as employment, community networks and social protection systems has led to a considerable rise in social inequality (Torres & Montero, 2004). In the mid-1960s, the European Economic Community concluded that, in order to establish policies for economic growth and progress, their actions had to be global and impact multiple levels (Brenner, 2003). It was against this backdrop that the first European poverty prevention plans were created (Rodriguez & Marbán, 2011), These programmes focused on alleviating the impacts of recession (fundamental to employment creation) and social change (such as changes in the role of women and in family structures); furthermore, such programmes supported the creation of social protection nets for the most disadvantaged in society. Analysis of these programmes and action plans shows that they focused on the following groups in particular: people with disabilities and special needs, children, migrants, homeless people, women, young people and people with addiction problems (Subirats, 2004). In March 2000, the European Council devised the Lisbon Strategy, which laid the foundations for the fight against social exclusion in the European Union (EU). Under the banner of Building an Inclusive Europe, member states moved forward on their commitment to social inclusion (Subirats, 2004). The European Commission set out the basis for inclusion policies through cooperation between member states. Furthermore, commitments were made and targets agreed for drawing up national

1 Introduction

7

action plans for social inclusion; these were to be included in the political programmes of European governments (Subirats, 2004). Three central social policy pillars were defined: economic growth, employment creation and a commitment to social inclusion. The European Commission’s Social Agenda 2005–2010 designated employment, social inclusion and the promotion of equal opportunities as key priorities. In order to promote equality between countries, European governments implemented programmes to ensure a redistribution of resources and the implementation of active employment policies for those excluded from the job market. Alongside a commitment to fighting poverty and improving inclusion and social cohesion, employment-­ related issues have since become a central focus of EU social policy. The year 2011 marked the start of a new era of European growth and social cohesion strategies, with active inclusion and poverty prevention as key targets. Europe 2020—the ten-year European Commission strategy which replaced the Lisbon strategy in 2010—addressed important challenges regarding the incorporation of active inclusion policies as fundamental elements of national reform programmes. One of the social inclusion strategy objectives was to establish the European Platform against Poverty and Social Exclusion (EPAPSE) creating a unique opportunity to develop the European social agenda. Europe 2020 focused on key issues such as strengthening the institutional centrality of the fight against poverty and social exclusion. In addition, the strategy addressed the following crucial poverty-related issues: active inclusion, child poverty, housing exclusion and poverty, and poverty amongst ethnic minorities and immigrants. Furthermore, it specified quantified objectives and multi-year work programmes, as well as clear and precise mechanisms for monitoring and evaluating processes and results. This led to the creation of national platforms against poverty (Rodriguez & Marbán, 2011).

1.5  The Role of Social Work in an Inclusive Europe When discussing the role of social work in inclusive societies, it is essential to refer to the global definition of social work adopted by the International Association of Schools of Social Work (IASSW) and the International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW) in 2014. Their aim was to overcome the complexity of defining a profession that deals with intangible variables, such as ethical and cultural values. According to Payne (2006): social work constantly redefines itself as it is influenced by others, by social needs and social change, and by its own internal discourse about its nature. There are continuities in social work: particular elements that operate together in a constantly changing balance to meet its central claim. To understand social work, we must explore and analyse: we must understand the continuities and analyse the social context that construct how they are played out in particular social or interpersonal situations (p. 2).

Social work is intersubjective in relation to all social agents who intervene in the processes of action or social intervention within the disciplinary field. Thus, ­citizens,

8

C. Palacín Bartrolí et al.

politicians and social workers contribute to an idea of social work which is specific to particular national and historical contexts, and the corresponding underlying values. As a result, the IFSW and IASSW proposed using a participative process to define social work; this was an attempt to overcome ethnocentric and Eurocentric biases and to include all relevant aspects of the profession. The IFSW proposed a definition of social work in 2000, and this was adopted by the IASSW in 2001. In order to expand this to an internationally agreed definition of social work, a participatory process was initiated in 2000. As General Secretary of the IFSW with responsibility for coordinating this process, Truell (2014) explained how divergent points of view between countries—especially between Northern and Asia-Pacific regions—led to difficulties but also enriched the final result of the collaborative process. The international definition is not regarded as final but as open to continuous revision. Accordingly, the most recent definition includes social inclusion as a fundamental responsibility of social work: ‘In solidarity with those who are disadvantaged, the profession strives to alleviate poverty, liberate the vulnerable and oppressed, and promote social inclusion and social cohesion’ (International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW), 2014). This definition is based on the premise that multiple interconnected factors—historical, socio-economic, cultural, geographical, political and personal—can serve as opportunities or barriers to human well-being and development (International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW), 2014). As barriers, these factors contribute to the perpetuation of inequalities, discrimination, exploitation and oppression. It is essential that such barriers are broken down using technical, scientific and policy solutions to ensure that no individuals, groups or communities experience exclusion. The right to equal opportunities should be guaranteed, regardless of social background. To sum up, social work is about taking action based on the principles of ‘social justice, human rights, collective responsibility and respect for diversities’ (International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW), 2014) when addressing psychosocial vulnerabilities. In line with this idea, Zamanillo (1999) suggests that social work interventions should be used to respond to psychosocial distress. Such distress can be a result of: (a) personal experiences in a range of social environments, such as family, work, community or institutions; or (b) structures which hinder individual growth and can lead to poverty, social and cultural deprivation, dependence, marginalisation, social disintegration, disaffection, social deviance and other situations that may restrict an individual’s autonomy, social identity or development. Whilst the research discussed in this book demonstrates the context specificity of social work, it also provides examples of how social work functions as a mechanism and a response to psychosocial vulnerability in accordance with the International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW) (2014) principles of social work described earlier. This not only means working with vulnerable people directly but also involves other processes, such as research, and social and political activism. Mary Richmond (1922) first defined social casework as seeking ‘to effect better social relations by dealing with individuals one by one or within the intimate group of the family’ (p. 223). Richmond (1922) also referred to three other forms of social work

1 Introduction

9

‘which interplay with case work … group work, social reform, and social research’ (p. 223). It is evident that even a century ago, research played an important role, not only in the production of practical and scientific knowledge but also in a socio-­ political context. Furthermore, Richmond (1922) described other ways in which social work improves social relations through ‘a wide variety of group activities— settlement work, recreational work, club, neighborhood and local community work—in which the individual, though still met face to face, becomes one of a number’ (p. 223). This approach remains relevant today and can strengthen societal progress towards more inclusive practices.

1.6  The Structure of This Book This book aims to consolidate the findings of the social work research conducted by research groups in four different EU countries and to establish a critical reflection on inclusive society and social policy, as well as on the discussions surrounding these issues. Furthermore, it seeks to highlight the paradoxes that exist within welfare systems in relation to the participation of particular groups. The six chapters in this book were created on the basis of common aspects identified by the four research teams at the group meetings. This introduction has outlined the key themes and concepts discussed in the following chapters. Chapter 2 considers the notion of inclusive society in the Netherlands and addresses the debate on processes of citizens’ decision-making and participation. It also discusses paradoxes of inclusion relating to research in the following fields: young mothers and the Dutch welfare system, activation jargon and its distancing of elderly citizens and the effects of bureaucratic jargon, measuring informal care and social networks in neighbourhoods, and social district teams caught between policy requirements and the challenges of social work practice. Chapter 3 refers to research carried out at two Barcelona universities and examines the situation of several social groups which move between the zones of inclusion, vulnerability and disaffiliation: gay men aged over 50, homeless people, migrants and Roma migrant women. This chapter reflects on the notions of inequality, inclusion/exclusion and inclusive society. It identifies key players in implementing inclusion processes and considers the roles of the public sector and third sector organisations. Furthermore, the chapter discusses the role of social work in relation to research involving the four marginalised groups mentioned earlier. Chapter 4 considers interpretations of the term inclusion in Croatia; it examines the impact of the complex post-socialist transformation process on social structures and social work practice in Croatia. The research projects discussed focus on inclusive education and the deinstitutionalisation of people with physical and intellectual disabilities in a range of social work contexts. Furthermore, the chapter explores how the emergence of new social work practices has led to structural and practice-­ related changes in the Croatian social welfare system.

10

C. Palacín Bartrolí et al.

Chapter 5 describes the discourse on inclusion in contrast to integration in Germany; it considers Luhmann’s social systems theory in relation to research on social inequality and poverty. The research discussed focuses on inclusive social work practices regarding five disadvantaged groups: homeless young people, older substance users, school students with special needs, people with a migrant background and children from the Sinti community. In addition, this chapter considers the debates surrounding inclusive education, and the laws affecting children and young people with special needs in Germany. The concluding chapter (Chap. 6) compares interpretations of some of the key concepts explored in the four country chapters: inclusive society, participation, deinstitutionalisation, the transformation of the welfare state, the role of the third sector and the role of social work. In addition, the challenges and contradictions relating to the ambivalences of inclusive society are addressed. The final section contemplates the future of inclusion with regard to the difficulties of achieving full inclusion and the ambivalences associated with this process. The chapter concludes by considering the extent to which an inclusive approach—which has so far only partially been realised—can be understood as a real utopia (Wright, 2011).

References Bošković, S., Ilić-Stošović, D., & Skočić-Mihić, S. (2017). Prilagodba na studij s obzirom na neka obilježja studenata s invaliditetom. Revija za socijalnu politiku, 24(1), 73–92. Brenner, N. (2003). La formación de la ciudad global y el re-escalamiento del espacio del Estado en la Europa Occidental post-fordista. EURE.  Revista latinoamericano de estudios urbano regionales, 29(86), 5–35. Castel, R. (1997). Las metamorfosis de la cuestión social. Una crónica del salariado. Buenos Aires: Paidós. Castel, R. (2010). El ascenso de las incertidumbres. Trabajo, protecciones, estatuto del individuo. Buenos Aires: Fondo de Cultura Económica. Esping-Andersen, G. (1999). Social foundations of postindustrial economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Godàs, X. (2004). El concepte de nous moviments socials: una revisió crítica. Barcelona: Fundació Nous Horitzons. International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW) (2014). Global definition of the social work profession. Retrieved 11 March, 2020, from https://www.ifsw.org/what-is-social-work/ global-definition-of-social-work/ Koster, M. (2014). Bridging the gap in the Dutch participation society: New spaces of governance, brokers, and informal politics. Etnofoor, 26(2), 49–64. Luhmann, N. (1997). Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Marí-Klose, P., & Marí-Klose, M. (2013). ¿Cómo se reduce la pobreza en los países ricos? ¿Políticas de aseguramiento, redistribución y asistencia social en el Estado de Bienestar? In E. Del Pino & M. J. Rubio (Eds.), Los Estados de Bienestar en la encrucijada. Políticas sociales en perspectiva comparada (pp. 310–338). Madrid: Tecnos. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2008). Growing unequal? Income distribution and poverty in OECD countries. Paris: OECD Publishing. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2011). Divided we stand: Why inequality keeps rising. Paris: OECD Publishing.

1 Introduction

11

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2015). In it together: Why less inequality benefits all. Paris: OECD Publishing. Payne, M. (2006). What is professional social work? Bristol, UK: Policy Press. Richmond, M.  E. (1922). What is social case work? An introductory description. New  York: Russell Sage Foundation. Rodriguez, G., & Marbán, V. (2011). Estudio comparado sobre Estrategias de inclusión activa en los países de la Unión Europea. Madrid: Ministry of Health, Social Services and Equality. Subirats, J. (2004). Pobresa i exclusió social. Una anàlisi de la realitat espanyola i europea. Barcelona: Fundació “La Caixa”. Torres, J., & Montero, A. (2004). Políticas económicas, pobreza y desigualdad: “la nueva pobreza”. In J.  F. Tezanos Tortajada (Ed.), Tendencias en desigualdad y exclusión social. Tercer Foro sobre tendencias sociales (pp. 77–104). Madrid: Editorial Sistema. Truell, R. (2014). Report to the IFSW 2014 general meeting on the review of the global definition of social work. Retrieved 12 March, 2020, from http://cdn.ifsw.org/assets/ifsw_94359-2.pdf Wright, E. O. (2011). Real utopias for a globalized sociology. Global Dialogue: Magazine of the International Sociological Association, 1(5), 3–4. Zamanillo, T. (1999). Apuntes sobre el objeto en Trabajo Social. Cuadernos de Trabajo Social, 12, 13–32.

Chapter 2

Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Netherlands Maria José Freitas, Jhoy Dassen, Samira Louali, Marijke Sniekers, Chantal van Lieshout, and Carin Wevers

2.1  Inclusive Society: A Developing Discourse In recent years, a number of developments in Dutch social policy and social work have contributed to a specific understanding of an inclusive society—a society for all. Two independent developments in social welfare, which occurred over the same period, provide a backdrop to this chapter. These developments also facilitate each other as part of a larger discourse on inclusive society. After an explanation of these developments, this chapter will present four research projects which illustrate the inherent paradoxes in the Dutch participation society. The first of these social welfare developments is the 2006 UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN CRPD), which brings the idea of an inclusive society to the forefront. This created a legally binding tool that stipulated the inclusive protection of the rights of persons with disabilities (UN General Assembly, 2006). The second development was the Dutch Government’s restructuring of the national welfare policy and its declaration of a participation society. The idea of a participation society resembles the English language concept of inclusive society and denotes the active involvement of all citizens in all areas of society, regardless of vulnerabilities or limitations (Ferguson, 2008; Ministerie van Volksgezondheid Welzijn en Sport, 2015). The term participation society was first introduced into political rhetoric in the 1990s by Wim Kok, the Dutch Prime Minister at the time; it was then revived in 2013, when the Dutch monarch, King Willem-Alexander, used the term in an address to the nation. The term was further boosted by the Dutch government’s 2016 ratification of the UN CRPD. Both events advanced Dutch national reform to align with the aims of the international inclusive society movement. The ­participation M. J. Freitas (*) · J. Dassen · S. Louali · M. Sniekers · C. van Lieshout · C. Wevers Zuyd University of Applied Sciences, Social Studies Academy, Sittard, The Netherlands e-mail: [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 S. Bundschuh et al. (eds.), Ambivalences of Inclusion in Society and Social Work, European Social Work Education and Practice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55446-0_2

13

14

M. J. Freitas et al.

society has since come to symbolise Dutch welfare reform; it calls on Dutch citizens to find ways to strengthen their own well-being. Each citizen is expected to co-create society, to build the (personal) relationships needed to foster inclusion and, in doing so, to help build a better society. The UN CRPD vision of an inclusive society advocates for all people to live alongside one another in a shared society, regardless of their disabilities, and to accept each other as they are. The inclusive society perspective is accommodating, i.e., it includes people with disabilities while keeping sight of the support they need in order to be able to fully participate in society. Unlike the participation society approach, the UN CRPD perspective signifies a shift in the ownership of disability from the individual to society as a whole; hence society becomes a central agent of change. The changes in welfare provision implemented in the Netherlands, while not altogether new, denoted a fundamental shift from centralised social policy—which emphasised equality and collective solidarity—to localised social policy promoting freedom of choice and individual responsibility. Characterised by decentralisation and deregulation, these changes have had a significant impact on governance and citizens alike. Supporters of change praise these developments as a move towards a more genuine society as they call for citizen activation. However, critics accuse the government of deserting the most vulnerable groups in society (Koster, 2014). The three Ds (three decentralisations) is the term used to refer to the three pieces of legislation that transferred responsibility to local authorities and shaped the contours of reform in a move towards local community care. The Social Support Act (Wet Maatschappelijke Ondersteuning 2007/2015), with its motto of everyone participates, covers a range of issues from the provision of care in the home to participation in local policy-making (Bannink & Ossewaarde, 2012). The new Youth Care Act (Jeugdwet 2015) includes everything from generic prevention services to target-­ specific youth care support. The third piece of legislation, the Participation Act (Participatiewet 2015), delineates long-term income support for vulnerable groups in the labour market, namely, people with special physical or cognitive needs, and the long-term unemployed. In addition to the significant new responsibilities and expenditures passed on to local authorities, decentralisation was intended to reduce administration, i.e., less bureaucracy enables swift local action that is preventive, effective and tailored to local needs. Care and support services are provided by (professional) practitioners in what is referred to in the Netherlands as the social domain (het sociaal domein). This involves a cluster of local practitioners, such as health and social care providers, as well as schools, volunteers, active citizens and civil society groups, who work with local government to develop, implement and evaluate care and social support services. Dutch social workers are part of the change processes occurring in the Netherlands and they are taking on a variety of new roles in their plight to support more vulnerable members of society. Social workers are operating in unprecedented ways, and in new professional compositions and contexts, to tackle the effects of reductions in funding and the discontinuation of mechanisms that previously facilitated

2  Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Netherlands

15

i­nvolvement in social life. Social workers are currently in the process of determining how they can carry out their work in a participation society: How can citizens be helped to help themselves? How can they be supported if they are unable to fill the gaps resulting from decentralisation and deregulation? How can social workers operate within these new structures?

2.1.1  From (Social) Integration to Inclusive Society While integration and its variant, social integration, have been commonplace in the Netherlands for decades, the concept of inclusive society is relatively new. The discourses which shaped these concepts have taken many turns and accompanied the policy shifts that have characterised the development—and demise—of the Dutch welfare state. Today, the concept of social integration shares the stage with social inclusion and inclusive society but is distinguished from the latter. Social integration is largely associated with ethnosocial concerns whereby there is a focus on getting people to participate in society based on Dutch norms. For example, a person with a disability is expected to participate in society by adapting the disability to fit into the larger society; similarly, a newcomer to the Netherlands is expected to master the Dutch language and understand the culture so as to participate in society. More specifically, the concept of integration is at the heart of migration and immigration policy debates in the Netherlands. It is part of a politically laden discourse focused on newcomers to the country. In this context, integration looks to the individual for change (e.g., the disabled person or the newcomer) and aims to bring that individual into mainstream society. The concept of integration entered the Dutch policy framework in the 1980s when the Netherlands acknowledged its status as a country of immigration and began to develop minority policies for the integration of migrants. The multicultural nature of Dutch integration policy meant that it supported and empowered ethnic minority communities through specific minorities policies. By the end of the decade, policy focus had moved towards the education of migrants and ethnic minorities as a way of boosting integration. The Newcomers Integration Law 1998 (Wet Inburgering Nieuwkomers 1998), which obliged newcomers to participate in an integration programme to prepare them for becoming a part of Dutch society, is evidence of the increasingly restrictive nature of the concept (Joppke & Morawska, 2014). By 2007, the Civic Integration Law (Wet Inburgering) went as far as introducing a focus on certain types of newcomers and imposed the adoption of Dutch norms and values upon them. Today, the rigid integration legislation in the Netherlands can be summed up as participation-centred and enforced through compulsory integration. Newcomers are, for example, obliged to take civic integration exams (before and/or after entering the Netherlands), attend language classes, sign a participation statement and demonstrate explicit efforts to integrate. In contrast to inclusive society, integration is a controversial concept in the Netherlands because it is immersed in political rhetoric and susceptible to dogmatic

16

M. J. Freitas et al.

manipulation. Although integration can be regarded as a way of enabling newcomers to participate more fully in Dutch society, it can also be seen as a tactic to curb migration to the Netherlands altogether. The concept of inclusion, and more specifically the idea of an inclusive society, shifts the focus away from the contentious issue of immigration; this creates space for a new concept based on the notion of equality—as in the UN CRPD. From this viewpoint, the new concept of inclusive society reshapes the social agenda and tackles questions about how society accommodates the diversity of groups within it. It looks for pathways to participation: ways to accommodate people who lack the socioeconomic capital to live independently, to work, or to go to school. It aims to keep people active in local communities well after their retirement. An inclusive society provides support for people enabling them to develop their strengths and capabilities, and to thrive as autonomous members of society. But to what extent is this move towards inclusiveness in the Netherlands—by means of a participation society—also a move towards a more genuine, citizen-centred society? What are for the impacts in terms of social justice? Are the most vulnerable citizens actually benefiting from deregulation and citizen-centred initiatives?

2.1.2  The Do Democracy Today, the participation society, also known as the do democracy, adds to the long-­ running discourse on democracy in the Netherlands. Klaartje Peters (Peters, van Stipdonk, & Castenmiller, 2014) describes it as a form of democracy that is still trying to find its place in Dutch society. She states that, unlike representative and participative models of democracy, in the do democracy, citizens take it upon themselves to address concerns rather than wait for political decision-making. In 2010, the Trust in Democracy (Vertrouwen op democratie) report (Raad Voor Openbaar Bestuur, 2010) looked at the debate surrounding restoring citizens’ faith in politics and the democratic decision-making process, and advised the government on how to provide citizens with a more effective structural role in envisioning government policy. A few years later, the promotion of (political) participation became part of the decentralisation process and a main goal of legislation such as the Social Support Act (2015). The primary objective of decentralisation is the realisation of a fundamentally different, more democratic relationship between citizens and government in the social domain. As part of this process, local authorities have gained an important voice in relation to the development of social policy because of their proximity to citizens, as well as to local care and welfare organisations. This closeness meant that local authorities were far better able to address the most pressing problems in the social domain. Furthermore, they established Social Support Councils (Wmo-­ raden), which provide a forum for citizens and interest groups, and enable them to get involved in the policy-making process. This was intended to provide an alternative both to formal consultative bodies and to a corporate, bureaucratic government.

2  Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Netherlands

17

Local policy progressively emphasises small-scale, informal citizen-based initiatives, which receive government support without being hampered by bureaucratic regulations. These informal, citizen-based activities are also known as the do democracy; the Dutch government even marketed this widely used concept on a promotional sticker: ‘It’s your neighbourhood, you decide’. (Het is jouw wijk, dus jij mag het zeggen.) (Tonkens & De Wilde, 2013). This call to action was a way to reduce bureaucracy while assigning citizens greater responsibility for managing their own care and support needs (Tonkens, 2003). Austerity measures, changing views on citizenship, and the duties and functions of the state were among the leading principles behind the Participation Act and the Youth Care Act. Since the introduction of the Participation Act in 2015, citizens who cannot fully participate in the labour market and who are partially or entirely dependent on government support are required to provide a quid pro quo in exchange for welfare benefits; this takes the form of volunteer work. In the case of the Youth Care Act, young people are supported by low-threshold youth care through social district teams (wijkteams). This form of localised support focuses on prevention as the way to minimise the number of young people ending up in specialised youth care. Social professionals are asked to provide hands-off help and to focus primarily on activating peoples’ social networks. Experience has shown, however, that citizens are reluctant to place a burden on their own network—if they have such a network in the first place. There is reluctance to put pressure on these valuable relationships in case there is a future need for unilateral, long-term assistance. 2.1.2.1  Self-Reliance In the discussion surrounding the ideals behind the participation society and how they can be shaped in practice, participation is sometimes used as a synonym for taking care of oneself without government assistance. This depiction, however, suggests that people who are unable to take care of themselves or to arrange the care they require do not participate, in contrast to citizens who are able to organise care for themselves and/or each other. This is a complex issue since the two situations are not mutually exclusive: a citizen who is dependent on one type of care may, at the same time, contribute actively to other social practices. Furthermore, this approach implies that there is something essentially wrong with people being dependent on the state and its institutions. This view fails to take into account that these institutions were created by the citizens themselves. Institutions are products of human action; structures in society emerged from people’s desire for improvement and change. From hospitals and housing corporations to social security and welfare institutions, virtually the entire welfare state was built on the foundations of citizen-­ based initiatives. Many of these initiatives eventually came under the auspices of the state. According to sociologist Duyvendak (2015), the rationale behind the concept of self-reliance is entirely the product of middle-class values. He suggests that there is a middle-class assumption that everyone can take care of themselves: this, however,

18

M. J. Freitas et al.

is not the case and there are many people in society who need care. Furthermore, he argues that the welfare state and the efforts of social professionals have primarily served to make people dependent. He suggests that a context in which a certain level of care is guaranteed provides people with a form of insurance, which helps them to develop their strengths and goals because of a reliance on other people. In other words, Duyvendak (2015) claims that an emphasis on individual personal strength and self-reliance may actually prevent certain groups in society from seeking help.

2.1.3  Social Work: Same Values, Different Meanings The traditional values of social work—empowerment, solidarity and social justice—have taken on new meanings from a contemporary neoliberal perspective. Empowerment used to mean ‘ensuring that citizens develop to their fullest potential’ (Van der Laan, 2006, p. 10). In the 1970s and 1980s, the concept acquired connotations of emancipation and politicising action, and by the 1990s it became synonymous with the promotion of autonomy. The neoliberal policy discourse of the 1990s redefined social justice through the assertion that the free market would ensure equal opportunities for all. What is forgotten, however, is that historically, social justice has required market intervention. The neoliberal notion is that solidarity leads to dependence and passivity rather than autonomy and individual initiative (Kunneman, 2007). Today, social professionals are less likely to refer to their work in terms of empowering people. Instead, they are more likely to describe it as promoting the self-reliance of citizens. The focus has shifted towards ensuring that citizens can manage the demands of their daily lives; this is quite different to ensuring that they are able to develop to their fullest potential. Gone are the notions of the welfare state’s initial duty of care and the right of citizens to receive care. The Dutch government no longer sees the provision of care as its primary task and citizens are expected to be active, responsible members of Dutch society who avoid unnecessarily relying on government assistance. In this process, the ideal of participation has somehow been transformed into a moral imperative for citizens to take care of one another; it dismisses the state’s duty of care and citizens’ rights to a variety of services and provisions. This imposed sense of caring and belonging is echoed in the research of Arts and Van Den Berg (2019), which argues that the Dutch state uses a pedagogy of optimism to instil acceptance and hope into its citizens in relation to the labour market. Their research on activating Dutch welfare programmes describes the state’s approach as normalising precarity in contemporary welfare programmes. Furthermore, it illustrates how the state teaches citizens to accept uncertainty and to be optimistic about it. Moreover, if a job seeker is being considered for welfare assistance, showing optimism is considered a positive trait (Arts & Van Den Berg, 2019, p. 83). Social professionals continue to support people when they are in need, even if such assistance is no longer promoted. However, terms such as helping and caring

2  Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Netherlands

19

have been replaced by empowering people, contributing to self-reliance and increasing the ability to self-regulate. The work of the social worker is to support people in (re-)gaining control of their lives. This is illustrated by the Care Pyramid (see Fig. 2.1) which places professional help in the form of facilities and services provided to the individual at the very top. People must first take care of themselves (self-reliance) and tap into their own networks, and then take care of one another (social networks). Only after that can they take advantage of collective facilities and services (collective provisions), such as day centres for those with cognitive disabilities. People are only entitled to professional help on an individual level (individual provisions) as a last resort. The fundamental change that has occurred is that rather than an automatic right to home care, such as help with household tasks, a walking frame or a disability parking permit, citizens who contact the local authorities requesting support are first invited to participate in a kitchen table talk (keukentafelgesprek) in their home. This informal meeting uses the Care Pyramid to determine how much a citizen can do for themselves, how far their personal social network extends, and who in that network might be able to contribute to providing care. Consequently, such meetings establish the extent to which the local authority will be required to provide care for a particular individual. It would be difficult to find another period in the history of Dutch social work which has involved the introduction of so many new methods and techniques over such a short period as in the first years of the Social Support Act (SSA) (Wevers, 2018). The SSA process is intended to be results-oriented; participation ladders and self-reliance matrices were introduced in order to measure results. The ladders allow social professionals to estimate how and to what extent an individual is

Fig. 2.1 The Care Pyramid. Published with permission from Bohn Stafleu van Loghum (Sprinkhuizen & Scholte, 2012)

20

M. J. Freitas et al.

p­ articipating, while the matrices are used to assess the degree of self-reliance. Both are useful measurement tools that can be discussed during a kitchen table talk. Since government care provision is no longer a right, social professionals are looking to methods such as the social network strategy (Scheffers, 2015) to assist them in mapping out a client’s social network as a path towards finding care. Once this network has been determined, the social professional can organise a meeting which brings together the client’s entire network to identify who can take on which tasks to support the client. Social workers no longer accompany clients to make benefit applications or call institutions on a client’s behalf. Today, these types of supportive tasks are carried out by volunteers or buddies. Virtually every local organisation now employs someone to identify how and for which types of work they can make use of volunteers or buddies.

2.1.4  The Participation Paradox The underlying ideal of the participation society—that everybody is included and everyone can take part—has become a moral imperative. In relation to labour market participation (The Participation Act), it is even a legal obligation: unless you participate, you do not contribute sufficiently to the community. Those who are unable to meet policy standards run the risk of exclusion. The combination of the demand for participation and the associated requirements actually lead to the opposite results of those intended; this is the participation paradox. The ideal of an inclusive society, which is a core value among social professionals, is identical to the ideal underlying the participation society. The difference lies in the fact that in the participation society, this ideal has become a moral and legal obligation. It is a prescribed way of living with provisions for good citizenship and this can lead to the exclusion of those who are unable or unwilling to comply. The underlying principle and ideal of the inclusive society is that everyone is included, regardless of their particular vulnerability. This approach is based on the question of what an individual needs in order to have a dignified life, assuming that they can only develop to their fullest potential within a community. It is therefore the responsibility of the state to create the necessary conditions so that citizens’ rights to self-determination can be realised.

2.2  Illustrating the Participation Paradox Working from within the ideology of the Dutch participation society means working from within a new structure that has a significant impact on both social domain professionals and community development. The following examples of practice-­ based research illustrate some of the paradoxes of participation. They provide insight into the struggle for care in a political context subject to a plethora of rules,

2  Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Netherlands

21

protocols and classifications: a practice context where the initiative (and responsibility) for care is placed upon the citizen. This is a unique sociopolitical setting for observations on the extent to which a participation society establishes an inclusive society.

2.2.1  P  aradox One: Indirect Exclusion by Rules and Regulations Supporting Participation 2.2.1.1  R  esearch Example: Young Mothers Navigating Social Support Systems Box 2.1 Research Example: Young Mothers Navigating Social Support Systems This research on the agency of young mothers in mothering, and educational and employment practices is an ethnographic study in a region of the Netherlands experiencing shrinkage in terms of ageing, declining birth rates, high unemployment and low educational levels among its population. The study identifies young mothers as women below the age of 27 who gave birth before the age of 24; this is a common understanding of the term among welfare and youth organisations. To learn about the lives of young mothers from an emic or insider perspective, participant observation was conducted for 18  months at the weekly meetings of two young mothers’ groups; this involved participating in informal conversations, workshops, arts and crafts sessions, cooking sessions, and visits to parks and playgrounds. This is combined with in-depth interviews with 41 young mothers and 18 social work professionals.

Young mothers navigate between the norms and structures of motherhood, economic independence and being young. Their agency is displayed in a range of different ways—from adhering to such norms and structures to challenging them. Young mothers in the Netherlands are often target groups of social policy and practice. Welfare organisations throughout the country have separate young mothers’ groups and trajectories to help young mothers get out of social benefit schemes and into school or employment (Oudhof, Zoon, & Van der Steege, 2013). In the Netherlands, young people under the age of 27 are expected to be in education or paid employment (Inspectie, 2014). Dutch youth policy pays particular attention to invisible young people: those below the age of 27 who are not in education or work, and are not receiving welfare benefits. Young mothers who stay at home taking care of their children and are dependent on a partner or parent for support are often considered to be part of this invisible group of young people (Nederland, Noordhuizen, & Van Dijk, 2016). These policy and practice perceptions of young motherhood

22

M. J. Freitas et al.

confirm the idea that just caring for a child is not a recognised occupation for a young person. It is not only social policy and social workers that focus on young mothers, there are also regular reports on this topic in the Dutch media (Brandt, 2012; Van den Boom, 2015; Van Dyck, 2013). For some years now, a popular television series has featured young mothers receiving help from famous Dutch mothers to overcome their problems (Van der Want, 2014). The well-known mothers urge these young women to lead healthy lives, finish their education, find a paid job or stabilise their relationship with their partner or the father of their child. Such media attention confirms stereotypes of foolish youngsters who cannot foresee the consequences of their actions. This represents a dominant norm in society, which views young women as incapable and unsuitable mothers; this seems to legitimise patronising behaviour towards and support for young mothers. Such media attention is characterised by the problematization and moralisation of young motherhood in Dutch society. The study in this section questions this image and characterisation of young mothers by exploring their agency in their everyday lives. Social Work Professionals’ Support for Young Mothers Welfare organisations work towards education and employment for young mothers. Trajectories of welfare organisations that assist them offer job training and support in making educational choices, as well as training in budgeting, parenting skills and developing social-emotional competencies (De Groot, Hoogenboezem, Huzen, Van Lier, & Van Staalduinen, 2015; Dudevszky, Lohman, De la Rie, & Van Twist, 2012). Youth care services pay particular attention to young mothers in order to ensure that their children are well taken care of and are raised ‘appropriately’ (Oudhof et al., 2013). In interviews, social work professionals reported that they use different methods or models, such as a strengths-based approach (Rapp & Goscha, 2011), or work with a life area model (Van Leeuwen-Den Dekker & Poll, 2016). These all focus on the capacities and capabilities of young mothers in various areas of life, such as emotional well-­being, physical well-being, financial situation, work and activities, or social networks. Social workers support young mothers in discovering what has gone well in their lives and how they can use this to develop and reach new goals for the future. In the mothers’ groups, the social work professionals mostly focus on increasing self-­ confidence, developing parenting skills, professional skills related to education and employment, and networks and creative skills (Sniekers, 2015). This is done in various workshops, for example, on job interviews or first aid for children; these are conducted by experts and take place in an informal context through walks to the park, and cooking or arts and crafts sessions. The vulnerability and lack of self-­ reliance of young mothers is a key element of social policy and practice, and interventions are aimed at changing this (Sniekers, 2015). The underlying assumption of such practices is that motherhood does not belong to young women and that young mothers need help.

2  Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Netherlands

23

Even though social workers meet with the women regularly, establishing goals to include young mothers in Dutch participation society can result in just the opposite. Trajectories and services, such as young mothers’ groups, single out young mothers as a specific group with special needs or problems that require a different approach. Young mothers, in contrast, emphasise their similarities to working mothers or women (of any age) who have just had children (Sniekers, 2017). The interventions and practices do not always match the ways in which young mothers live their lives (Sniekers, 2016). Furthermore, some women feel the need to exaggerate their problems and describe their situation as more dire than it actually is in order to be accepted as clients (Sniekers, 2017). In this way, they emphasise their economic vulnerability to fit into the structures and norms of housing and social work institutional contexts. Due to structural and normative challenges, young mothers experience difficulties in combining the tasks and responsibilities of motherhood with continuing their education or work (Sniekers & Van den Brink, 2018). They have their whole lives ahead of them so excluding them from education or work could lead to a life-long disadvantages; what they need is to be able to be a part of society now. The institutional structures of school and employment often do not correspond to the everyday lives and activities of young mothers. The inflexibility of such structures, policies and social practitioners could lead to the socioeconomic marginalisation of young mothers. While certain structures and interventions, such as separate young mothers’ groups, are intended to foster opportunities for these women to work or study, they can inadvertently lead to exclusion. Government benefit schemes are often a topic of discussion at young mothers’ groups. The women who receive welfare benefits encounter rules and interventions that work in opposite ways to those intended. The women feel that the voluntary work schemes, which they are obliged to take part in to receive benefits, keep them from their responsibilities as mothers. Their concept of mothering responsibilities is based on the notion that good motherhood means being there for your child rather than handing them over to a day-care centre in order to work (Sniekers & Van den Brink, 2018). Although there are structures and policies offering support to young mothers, these are often established by policy makers and social practitioners on the basis of perceptions, perspectives and norms related to the participation society. They do not reflect the viewpoints of young mothers, who perceive such support differently in the context of their everyday lives (Sniekers, 2017). Young mothers have to navigate and comply with these dominant structures and norms despite the fact that they neither represent nor assist them. The paradox of participation lies in the dominance of norms and structures that, on the one hand, aim to enable economic participation, but on the other hand, lead to exclusion in this area. At a structural and normative level, young mothers are often perceived as or categorised into a special group. Creating such categories inevitably includes or excludes people. For young women, inclusion in the group young mothers often means exclusion from the groups of students or working ­parents. These young women have responsibilities that their age-group peers do not, yet their responsibilities also correspond with those of their occupational peers.

24

M. J. Freitas et al.

Young mothers assert that policymakers and practitioners do not sufficiently recognise their needs, and that there is too much emphasis on what the government expects from them. This points to a conflict between the levels of policy and practitioners, and the level of young mothers. This conflict arises because young mothers go against the grain and reject expectations of how young people are supposed to live their lives. Motherhood is not considered a full form of participation; there is an expectation that it should be accompanied by paid work or education. Social workers need to continually and creatively explore the structures within which they operate. This enables them to take advantage of their flexible working environment, while also accounting for their interventions and challenging the ways in which such interventions include or exclude certain people. In an inclusive society, it is vital that social workers constantly deliberate on how institutional structures and policy requirements impact on and/or limit the individuals with whom they work, such as young mothers. 2.2.1.2  R  esearch Example: Distancing Elderly Citizens Due to Activation Jargon Box 2.2 Research Example: Distancing Elderly Citizens Due to Activation Jargon This research on active elderly citizens explored what it means to be an active citizen. It was conducted in Parkstad Limburg, the southernmost region of the Netherlands and an area which is characterised by its ageing population, low birth rates, high unemployment and low educational levels. The rapid ageing of the population in Parkstad also means that elderly people are seen as an important target group for activation in the area (Van Lieshout, 2016). The main data source used was a collection of 22 semi-structured interviews held with informants aged 55–85 who had different levels of education. At the time of the research, all informants were involved in their local community through activities in the fields of politics, sport, culture and well-being. The overall aim of the research was to obtain a multifaceted picture of where and how elderly people identify their activities within society. The process allowed for in-depth learning about what motivates elderly people to be active in society and provides insights into how this impacts on the role of social workers.

The Netherlands, like other European countries, has an ageing population. There are currently more elderly people than youngsters and the elderly population will continue to increase. This group of citizens are living longer, staying healthier longer, and they have more spare time than younger people. Furthermore, staying active positively affects health and keeps elderly citizens from becoming socially isolated. Finally, elderly people represent an accumulation of human and social capital that can be used to benefit other groups in society. The notion that elderly

2  Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Netherlands

25

people in retirement could contribute to society is fully in line with the philosophy of the participation society (Hospers & Reverda, 2012; Pennix, 2010). The aim of the policy is to keep elderly people healthy for longer and to encourage them to contribute socially as there is a real need for their knowledge and experience in society. However, there is a fine line between a demand and a moral imperative to give something back. Additionally, in the Netherlands, there are numerous government schemes that make it possible for elderly citizens to remain active, such as discounts on public transport fares or reduced admission to sociocultural events. From political, policy-­ related, economic and social perspectives, the participation of elderly citizens has an important place on the social agenda. Local politicians and policymakers have focused on the active participation of elderly people by devising campaigns like Silver Power and Real Talent Never Retires (Gemeente Heerlen, 2013). These campaigns aim to raise awareness and are attempts by national and local government to reassure the elderly that they are still valued in society. Indeed, the campaigns are intended to make the elderly realise that they have a vital place in society and that their accumulated life and work experience can be put to good use. This is particularly the case for retired citizens. From the policymakers’ perspective, this group has plenty of time, which could be devoted to social efforts (Reverda, 2014). As part of social welfare projects, elderly people are actively approached by social professionals, for example, through a home visit, and asked how they would like to contribute to society. Policymakers and social workers also develop projects which rely on the active participation of elderly people (Heerlen, 2003; Hesdahl & Sollet, 2011). However, while investing so much time and effort into thinking up ways to get the elderly to participate, these parties may fail to consider the wishes and abilities of elderly citizens, or to recognise what they are already contributing to society. What does being active actually mean to the elderly, and what are their motives for participating? Insufficient consideration is given to what we can learn from these individuals. This study looks at ways in which elderly people are already active, and what meanings and values they assign to being active, as well as the incentives and barriers they experience. A System(s) Perspective The interviews showed that elderly citizens are active in very different ways, these include: babysitting for grandchildren, providing informal care, rendering services to neighbours or friends, active involvement in club membership, voluntary work relating to health care and welfare or other areas, sitting on advisory boards, membership of a political party, and standing in municipal council elections. All of these activities allow elderly people to demonstrate their social commitment. For many of them, this commitment comes very naturally, which is why they are unable to ­comprehend why inactive elderly people around them fail to participate in society in a similar way—except, of course if they have health problems or provide care for

26

M. J. Freitas et al.

a partner. Indeed, this is one of the main reasons why elderly people give up their social commitments. In the context of the Social Support Act, projects and campaigns have urged elderly people in the Netherlands to participate socially. However, active elderly people do not feel that these calls to action relate to them. Concepts such as active citizenship, participation, informal care and voluntary work, which are often included in policymakers’ projects and campaigns, lose their impact when referred to outside the system or institutional perspective. In their everyday lives, elderly people interpret these terms differently to the policymakers’ intended meaning. This can lead to confusion when such terms are used in conversations and interviews, as is evident in the following examples: What exactly constitutes informal care? ‘Is not it natural to take care of someone because they are important to you?’ (personal communication, female-68, 2015). What is active citizenship? ‘I really have no idea what that means’ (personal communication, male-66, 2015). When does a volunteer think of their activities as voluntary work? One elderly interviewee said she did not think that all her activities at the community centre should be considered voluntary work. She would only use this term if she did something to help another person, it should not apply to activities done for pleasure. As such, her definition differs from the one used by policymakers. These are just a few examples of language and terms from the system which are only used and understood to a limited degree in the real world, or in the lives of elderly people. The use of system language is aimed at achieving strategic objectives (Van der Zwaard, 2012) that have little to do with the daily activities of elderly people. When a neighbour has suffered a heart attack and is unable to tend to his garden, an elderly acquaintance might worry about him and decide to help him out. Similarly, an elderly person might decide to have coffee with their lonely neighbour across the street on a weekly basis to keep her company. The fact that by doing this, they are contributing to the achievement of policy goals, such as the social inclusion of vulnerable citizens, is entirely coincidental, and is certainly not one of their motives. When it comes to being active, emotions are a very powerful driving force, whereas policy goals set by local authorities are not. Elderly people want to spend their time meaningfully, have fun while helping others, and share their knowledge and experience (Van Lieshout, 2016). Putting a policy label on their activities has no added value for them. Social Workers as an Instrument of the System In line with local authority policy, social workers formulate strategies to encourage elderly people to become active (Van der Zwaard, 2012). Social workers engage with elderly people through activating home visit programmes, approaching them in public spaces, such as supermarkets, or reaching out to them individually through previously established contacts. Active elderly people perceive this approach as very patronising as they are already socially involved. As a result, they have the

2  Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Netherlands

27

impression that their activities must comply with local authorities’ standards and that their active commitment is unrecognised and undervalued by social workers. This method of recruitment effectively induces less active elderly people to participate as volunteers in projects which provide health care and welfare for older citizens. Social workers invest considerable time and effort into devising and organising projects and activities for which voluntary participation by elderly people is a crucial success factor. When it comes to recruiting elderly people, time and effort are no issue, however, this enthusiasm seems to fade away once the elderly volunteers have been recruited. There is often a lack of adequate support through induction programmes, coaching on the job or aftercare with regard to the tasks volunteers are asked to perform. When elderly volunteers are involved in projects, the social workers they encounter appear to prioritise running their project. They often fail to focus on elderly volunteers’ wishes to perform their tasks in a meaningful way. Elderly volunteers who work as healthcare buddies indicate that they feel very alone, unless the social worker makes an effort to set up a network of buddies or a peer supervision system. Other volunteers report that the induction programme is inadequate or that they received insufficient preparation before being sent out as volunteers, for example, as a budget coach. The absence of aftercare is also experienced as problematic in the relationship between elderly volunteers and social workers: ‘It makes no sense to me. They tell you to take care of something, but then they never contact you afterwards to ask how it went. Too much trouble, I suppose. It makes no sense at all’ (personal communication, male-67, 2015). Elderly citizens generally understand that social workers are dealing with heavy workloads due to the many recent changes and budget cuts in the social domain; they feel this explains the inadequate conditions to stimulate older people to remain active. Nevertheless, elderly citizens have various motivations for becoming active: they feel the need to be a part of something and wish to establish new social contacts (Van Bochove, Tonkens, & Verplanke, 2014), they wish to gain new knowledge and experience, or they want to share their knowledge and experience with others (Pennix, 2010). It is these factors that primarily contribute to their most important driving force: enjoyment. At the same time, this is the very aspect that is neglected if social workers fail to focus on the motivations, talents and potential of elderly volunteers. Ultimately, if social workers focus on what motivates elderly people in their everyday lives, they are more likely to empower them to stay active. This case study of elderly citizens has shown that for this group, the policy language used by local authorities has little meaning. Many elderly citizens are already active, however, they use different languages to describe their activities. The government’s call for participation is based on legislative frameworks and jargon that is distant from the everyday activities elderly citizens undertake; this creates an unnecessary gap between policymakers and citizens. This risks alienating elderly citizens who are active in ways that are central to both their own and others’ well-being. The dominance of the system is seen in the actions of social workers, who are expected to activate elderly people in specific forms of participation. In doing this,

28

M. J. Freitas et al.

social workers may lose sight of the central focus of the lifeworld of their clients and become ever more entrenched in their role as an instrument of the state.

2.2.2  P  aradox Two: Not All Citizens Are Capable of Participating: Or Willing to 2.2.2.1  R  esearch Example: Measuring Informal Care and Social Networks in Neighbourhoods Box 2.3 Research Example: Measuring Informal Care and Social Networks in Neighbourhoods This research looked at the development and use of a Care Capacity Monitor (Zorgkrachtmonitor) as an instrument to support local policymakers, who measure informal care and social networks in neighbourhoods. The Research Centre Social Integration developed the instrument as part of its research in four neighbourhoods in Sittard-Geleen. The instrument, which entails a systematic search for ways to determine the ability of residents to participate in social and healthcare needs, was generated in this process. The Care Capacity Monitor, which is a bottom-up instrument, was tested in all four neighbourhoods and supported by data gathered through the secondary analysis of quantitative data, in-depth interviews and a focus group with key stakeholders. The research illustrates a local authority’s quest for ways to analyse citizens’ abilities to participate in their neighbourhoods within the new legislative framework. It also reflects on the role of social workers in this process.

Following the decentralisation of three laws, described earlier in this chapter, the local authorities in the Netherlands faced the challenge of gaining an insight into citizens’ abilities to support others—especially vulnerable people—in order to prevent them from being left behind in terms of social and healthcare needs. Studies have emphasised that social networks and types of support are important factors when it comes to informal care at a neighbourhood level. Social networks that have been established between residents are mainly focused on common issues, such as municipal gardening, neighbourhood safety and play facilities (Jager-Vreugdenhil, 2012). Linders (2010) prefers the term individualised neighbourliness, which incorporates the notion that support provided by residents within neighbourhoods is mainly based on one-to-one relationships. This type of informal care means that it has become more important for local policymakers in the Netherlands to monitor neighbourliness and physical environments with regard to the healthcare and social needs of citizens. Physical environments, such as neighbourhoods, have become an increasingly important factor for gaining insights into the informal care and social networks of citizens. From a sociological perspective, a neighbourhood can be seen

2  Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Netherlands

29

as a collection of communities because it refers to the environment where citizens live without being restricted to geographical dimensions (Witte, 2015). For this reason, monitoring the care capacity in neighbourhoods has become a priority for local authorities. Care capacity refers to the extent to which the self-reliance of citizens can be expected to provide social and healthcare support at a neighbourhood level. Informal care provided by residents is not always accessible to all communities in a neighbourhood. Social rule systems in neighbourhoods may block access to informal care because care recipients cannot comply with these rules due to their educational background, age, ethnicity or disabilities (Jager-Vreugdenhil, 2012). The extent of reciprocity is also an important factor in the relationship between people from vulnerable groups when implementing informal care (Bredewold, 2014). One of the key challenges for local authorities is gaining an insight into the scope and needs of informal carers at a neighbourhood level, as well as citizens’ abilities to provide vulnerable groups with informal care. Such an insight would enable local authorities to redefine their role by facilitating social networks that provide bottom-up informal care at a neighbourhood level. Where social and healthcare needs are too complex for informal neighbourhood carers, it should be possible to call on social work professionals and healthcare services. A Bottom-Up Research Instrument Bottom-up research instruments could help local government policymakers to monitor and improve their professional practice in terms of working within neighbourhoods. Such instruments could offer a different perspective when analysing a neighbourhood with regard to its residents and their social and healthcare needs. To illustrate this case, a bottom-up instrument (Care Capacity Monitor) was developed for policymakers to measure informal care and social networks, and hence to enable a structural analysis of neighbourhoods and their residents. This instrument allows policymakers to measure social, welfare and healthcare needs on the one hand, and residents’ ability to participate in these areas at a neighbourhood level on the other. The instrument guides the policymaker towards a more inclusive policy development approach. It uses secondary data and also collects qualitative data in order to analyse residents’ recourse to informal care, their social networks, and their social and healthcare needs at a neighbourhood level. It guides the policymaker through collecting demographic data on residents, as well as gathering other neighbourhood-­ specific data, such as the psychical characteristics of the neighbourhood, social cohesion, socioeconomic situation and the social and healthcare services. The qualitative part of the instrument (an interview guide) includes indicators for collecting data on residents’ capabilities, involvement and willingness to participate in terms of providing informal care in the neighbourhood, as well as data on needs within a neighbourhood in relation to the provision of informal care, for example, through local initiatives. Moreover, the qualitative data collected using these ­indicators provides an indication of what is needed in order to provide informal care for residents. Instead of developing policy from behind a desk, the qualitative part

30

M. J. Freitas et al.

of this instrument stimulates policymakers to go out into neighbourhoods and collect data via interviews with residents, social workers, care workers, social entrepreneurs and civil servants. This is as an essential element of measuring the informal care and social networks in a neighbourhood. Once the data has been analysed, the results have to be presented to a focus group which includes residents, people involved in neighbourhood initiatives, social workers, care workers, social entrepreneurs and civil servants. In this way, it is possible to establish whether a neighbourhood is able to provide informal care to facilitate inclusion, and whether additional intervention from local authorities is required in order to provide for the social and healthcare needs of those who require assistance. The Risks of Top-Down Measurement of Informal Care and Social Networks This research shows an example of a bottom-up instrument for measuring social and healthcare needs, and the status of informal care and social networks in neighbourhoods; it is an attempt to define the new role of local authorities in the Dutch participation society. The necessity of analysing social needs and health care at a neighbourhood level also implies a need to monitor the course of the transition towards a participation society. In the case of this research, it is important to note that the results do not lead to the conclusion that informal care and social networks can only be supported by local authorities. In other words, the crucial paradox in the Dutch participation society is that there will always be citizens who are unable to participate or to provide for the needs of vulnerable groups at a neighbourhood level. Furthermore, it will always be the responsibility of local governments to support these groups. This raises questions about the extent to which local authorities can support informal care and social networks at an informal, local neighbourhood level, and the extent to which self-reliance can be supported through a top-down approach. Another risk factor is the competence of policymakers in using bottom-up instruments to measure neighbourhoods, informal care and social networks from the top down. Using bottom-up instruments to analyse vulnerable groups in a neighbourhood, for example, strongly depends on the policymakers’ knowledge of a neighbourhood and their capacity to incorporate citizens’ perspectives into policy development and implementation. A lack of local knowledge or limited access to key stakeholders, who can provide comprehensive information about informal care and social networks in a particular neighbourhood, may lead to exclusion when local authorities have to take action, or to the stigmatisation of inactive groups in the neighbourhood. This also raises the question of whether the use of bottom-up instruments leads to over-generalised conclusions about how residents’ participation is organised and accessed. In this research, which tested the aforementioned bottom-up instrument, the socioeconomic position of residents challenged local authorities’ general ­assumptions about particular neighbourhoods. For example, one suburban neighbourhood in the study, where residents had a low socioeconomic position, was clas-

2  Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Netherlands

31

sified as problematic. However, the key stakeholders who participated in the interviews and focus group emphasised the strong informal networks and the number of initiatives present in the neighbourhood to provide for the needs of its residents (Louali, Potting, Reverda, & Ročak, 2016). By contrast, one inner-city neighbourhood had a relatively high socioeconomic position and its residents were considered to have a high potential for providing informal care. In this neighbourhood, however, there was a high proportion of elderly people and the interviews showed that there were no known initiatives by social networks in the neighbourhood to provide for social and healthcare needs (Louali et al., 2016). Finally, there were two neighbourhoods (former villages) with average socioeconomic positions in comparison to the other neighbourhoods. These neighbourhoods were viewed as having informal care and social networks because there were a large number of sports and cultural associations, and residents were active members of them (Louali et al., 2016). It is necessary to invest in such social structures in order to maintain informal care via social networks. To this end, policymakers need to exercise caution when using any form of instrument measuring informal care and social networks in a neighbourhood. Emic bottom-up approaches are key to shaping the new role of local authorities and creating an inclusive society for all neighbourhood residents. Opportunities for Social Workers Taking the risks and paradox into account raises questions about the role of social workers in the process of using bottom-up instruments from the top down. Should bottom-up instruments, such as the Care Capacity Monitor, also be used by social workers? If not, to what extent should social workers be actively involved in the process of measuring informal care and social networks? These questions also show the complexity of the learning environment and the social context in which social workers are active. A changing context creates new opportunities for social workers enabling them to gain new information about changes in social context using bottom-­up instruments. Policymakers and social workers actively cooperate during the measurement of informal care and social networks. In the future, policymakers and social workers could, for example, apply the Care Capacity Monitor separately in order to identify similarities and differences in their neighbourhood analyses. In addition, social workers could advise policymakers on using this instrument to illustrate differences between local authorities. Identifying key stakeholders representing different groups in a neighbourhood can also help to create an inclusive environment for all residents. Local authorities hold the purse strings and contract out work to practitioners in the social domain to carry out policy goals. This means that policymakers decide which neighbourhood initiatives are pursued. The involvement of social workers in this process is key because local policy, and the interventions resulting from it have a direct effect on social work practice in these neighbourhoods.

32

M. J. Freitas et al.

In the coming years, it is essential for the state to gain a clearer understanding of its citizens and their ability to play a role in the Dutch participation society. This case study has shown the dilemmas faced by local authorities in fulfilling their new role and shaping their working methods in the participation society. The developments in the Netherlands show that measuring the results of social, educational and healthcare policy has increasingly become a goal for the state. Monitoring developments in neighbourhoods and measuring informal care and social networks is therefore also a step towards defining the new role of local governments in the Netherlands. This research shows that there is a need for local government policymakers to analyse neighbourhoods and to measure residents’ needs and abilities in the context of providing informal care via local social networks. The question is to what extent local authorities can support informal care and social networks, and to what extent self-reliance can be supported from the top down. Using bottom-up instruments is a way to analyse neighbourhoods from the top down and to measure informal care and social networks at a neighbourhood level. However, this process is potentially problematic; possible risks include: the belief that supporting informal care and social networks is only possible from the top down, generalisation or stigmatisation of particular groups, limited access to comprehensive information on informal care and social networks for key stakeholders at a neighbourhood level, or the exclusion of local groups identified as inactive. An awareness of exclusion when using bottom-up instruments, as well as cooperation between policymakers and social workers, are therefore vital when implementing inclusive policies to ensure that the Dutch participation society is a society for all. 2.2.2.2  R  esearch Example: Social District Teams Caught Between Policy and Practice Box 2.3 Research Example: Social District Teams Caught Between Policy and Practice This partnership between the Research Centre Social Integration and Neighbourhood-Centred Care was set up to develop a support package for (social) professionals who, in the context of the new Social Support Act, have to work with citizens to solve the problems that impede the proper provision of care and support due to the new legislative context. By means of action research and learning communities, (social) professionals, citizens, local policy officers and researchers are collaborating to develop effective and efficient ways of working in social district teams in two local authorities in the south of the Netherlands. The research focuses on the development of simple tools that help identify support questions and methods enabling suitable solutions to be implemented for citizens.

2  Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Netherlands

33

As part of the three decentralisations, the Dutch government transferred 16 billion euros in funding to local authorities for the organisation and implementation of the three new acts (Kruiter, Bredewold, & Ham, 2016). The rationale behind this transfer of funds supported the idea that the proximity of funds and services to the client would enable the delivery of better care services at a reduced cost (Bredewold, Kampen, Verplanke, Tonkens, & Duyvendak, 2016). In the period leading up to decentralisation, local authorities prepared for change by experimenting with new methods of organisation. Most authorities turned to social district teams as a means of organising access to care and support services, even though legally, local authorities are free to choose the most appropriate way to organise care and support according to the local situation. A total of 234 local authorities (about 60% of all local authorities in the Netherlands in 2015) participated in a survey on the latest developments in the social domain carried out by the Association of Netherlands Municipalities. Of those local authorities, 87% worked with social district teams or other types of neighbourhood-level organisations (Van Arum & Schoorl, 2016). These social district teams are an embodiment of the ‘proximity promise’ (Bredewold et al., 2016) in that they are composed of practitioners from different professional and organisational backgrounds. These professionals (1) work together and strive for an integrated approach, (2) are more easily accessible to citizens because they focus on neighbourhoods and make their presence felt in those communities, and (3) work according to the latest social support concepts so as to organise care and support in close proximity to clients. The social district teams are tasked with stimulating citizens’ autonomy, promoting the use of informal networks and involving professional help as needed. They support volunteer initiatives and bolster social cohesion in neighbourhoods. The new professionals who make up these teams face a different set of requirements: they are expected to be both generalist and multidisciplinary practitioners who work preventively, are focused on the neighbourhood, and are aware of the financial consequences of their actions (Pruim, 2016). In practice, social district team professionals struggle with this new policy, and with their new roles and working methods. Recent research has yielded relatively few answers (Keuzenkamp, 2015). The project Optimal Social Support for Citizens (Optimale Maatschappelijke Ondersteuning van Burgers) brings together citizens, professionals from the social domain, officials from two medium-sized municipalities and researchers to further develop the social district team concept. Learning communities have been set up to tackle the challenges emerging from professional practice and to formulate action plans that contribute to care delivery by team professionals. Some of these challenges relate to the role of professionals in bolstering social networks and neighbourhood cohesion. To date, the professionals attached to the project have not been able to devote attention to this assignment due to their time commitments dealing with the many requests for support from individual citizens in both municipalities. Furthermore, these social professionals have not been trained to promote networking and neighbourhood cohesion. The most significant problem they have encoun-

34

M. J. Freitas et al.

tered, however, concerns the limitations of social networks in dealing with the demands they face. Between Policy and Practice Professionals receive requests for support from individual citizens who have found their way to the social district team either independently or with the help of their social network. Their level of autonomy depends on how this term is defined. If it is defined as ‘the ability to lead an independent life with minimal support from the government’ (Boer & van der Lans, 2011), turning to government-funded professionals for support can be interpreted as a sign of diminished autonomy. This definition puts autonomy at the other end of the spectrum from dependency. Nevertheless, these citizens exhibit a certain level of control over their lives in that they are able to turn to others when they need help. Citizens who require support but are unable to ask for help (whether temporarily or permanently), or those who do not know where to find help, remain off the radar of social district teams. These are the ‘rudderless’ (Vlindt, 2012), individuals who are in need of support but are unable to organise it for themselves. In recent years, considerable attention has been paid to the cognitive skills required to remain in control of one’s own life: intelligence, the ability to read and write, as well as the ability to structure information received and to draw conclusions from it. It is increasingly apparent that noncognitive skills also play a part in an individual’s ability or inability to stay in control or ask for help. A person’s capacity to act is influenced by their life circumstances and personality. Poverty and stress are among the factors that have a negative effect on an individual’s capacity to think and act (Wetenschappelijke Raad voor het Regeringsbeleid, 2017). Socially vulnerable groups and individuals in temporary distress lack the ability to seek support; this means that they are overlooked by social district teams. In this research project, the participating social district teams are mainly composed of professionals who are accustomed to a question-oriented approach due to their training or experience. Outreach and location-oriented approaches are not part of their default skill set. Moreover, government policies that emphasise autonomy, control over one’s own life and self-reliance, are an uneasy fit with existing types of support, which rely on professionals taking the initiative to establish a support service relationship. Professionals struggle with this divergence and are still looking for ways to reach those who are in need of support but who do not actively seek it. Social professionals also indicate that they are unsure how to respond to requests for support from third parties. Privacy considerations and a fear of being perceived as meddling are currently keeping professionals from actively seeking out those who need help. Although the concept of autonomy is a key focus point in policy documents and its importance is constantly impressed on professionals, it is proving to be an obstacle to individuals contacting social district teams and receiving the support that they are entitled to under the Wmo.

2  Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Netherlands

35

Citizens who are capable of requesting support are also confronted with appeals to their autonomy. However, the degree to which these individuals are able to solve their problems independently is limited; this is why they seek professional support. Members of the social district team work together with clients to explore their individual capabilities; the aim is that those seeking support should do as much as they are capable of themselves. With regard to the support required, the team members explore opportunities within the client’s own network, in accordance with the Wmo. The interviews with clients and professionals from the social domain in both municipalities revealed the difficulty of this task. Clients do not want to overburden their own networks or be reliant on their children. They are sometimes concerned that making use of their network will present a barrier to receiving the support they need. There are also very practical reasons why relying on the client’s network is not always an option, such as full work schedules, travel time between the client and network members or personal problems. In addition, some clients’ network members are reluctant to offer support that runs counter to the nature of their relationship with the client. Although social district team professionals always explore opportunities within the client’s network first, such opportunities are rare. Other research (Bredewold et al., 2016) has also revealed that, while social district team professionals embrace the notion of employing the client’s network, in practice, when they receive a request for support, this is rarely an option. Professionals not only encounter weak or non-existent networks, but also networks that already provide the requested support and are unable to offer more. Moreover, a recent survey (Pommer & Boelhouwer, 2017) demonstrated that the level of professional support provided to citizens under the Wmo decreased in 2016 (compared to 2015). Members of clients’ networks are unable or unwilling to fill the gaps. There is no data available on whether clients succeed in finding the support they requested, and, if so, how this was achieved. If a citizens’ own capabilities and increased use of their own network are not options or are insufficient to address their needs, they have to turn to informal public services (e.g., neighbourhood schemes) or collective services (e.g., community centres). While professionals in learning communities have some knowledge about the available services in their neighbourhoods, they often seek recourse to systems (usually online) that provide an inventory of these services. In addition, they strive to make these systems more accessible to citizens, who are then able to find suitable solutions themselves. The available services are scarce and not every service is accessible to every client. Although improved access to such services is a central tenet of the participation policy, it is not self-evident that clients with different needs will make use of the same services. Furthermore, professionals disagree about the kind of support they should offer to help citizens gain access to these services. Whereas some are of the opinion that citizen autonomy is paramount and citizens are themselves responsible for accessing services, others are inclined to guide and support them until a solution has actually been achieved. Professionals who depend on the self-reliance of clients run the risk of overlooking their limited capacity to act, while other professionals may feel that they are acting counter to the new policy aim of supporting people for no longer

36

M. J. Freitas et al.

than required. An additional problem is that local authorities offer professionals few options for short-term support. Finally, the social district teams in both municipalities are largely composed of professionals whose training or experience makes them poorly equipped to implement the government’s policy to make more use of neighbourhood networks. These care professionals are used to approaching clients individually and are insufficiently trained on how to develop communities or support and reinforce citizen initiatives and collective services. They need to be taught a community and network-focused approach; this takes time and requires a revision of existing assumptions about what constitutes best practice. The Wmo provides a step-by-step guide to how professionals should deal with citizens’ requests for support. The objective of this approach, which is based on notions of self-reliance and autonomy, is to enable people to live at home for longer and be active in their neighbourhoods. Social district team professionals have been tasked with handling (and preferably resolving) requests for support in line with current policy concepts. In practice, this process has turned out to be difficult. The policy now in place is ill-suited to professional practice because many clients are insufficiently self-reliant, social networks are being overburdened and public services are not always available or suitable. As a consequence, the majority of requests for support will continue to require professional intervention. While citizens who require this support will be described as the least self-reliant individuals, professionals will struggle to square the provision of support with their duty to consider financial consequences. In order to stick to the basic principle that it is best practice to promote citizen participation, it is essential that professionals have and make use of the opportunity to explore notions of autonomy and self-reliance. In this regard, it is important to establish realistic expectations in relation to the use of networks and public services, otherwise there is a risk that social district teams will fail to reach certain groups, and that citizens and their networks will be overburdened. If this occurs, for such individuals, participation in society becomes nothing more than a mirage blurred by policy aspirations.

2.3  Observations from the Research Examples 2.3.1  T  he Mismatch Between Social Policy, Practice and Citizens Social policy is dominant in the social domain. People, especially the more vulnerable groups in society, are having to navigate their way through government-led systems and norms. As a result, individuals have to comply with these structures and norms, regardless of whether these fit their needs and aspirations. It seems that institutional arrangements do not relate to the everyday lives and practices of citizens.

2  Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Netherlands

37

Research informants refer to inflexible structures, policies and civil servants applying rules and interventions which end up preventing individuals from receiving welfare benefits. In the example of young mothers, voluntary work schemes—which are not really voluntary—keep young mothers from their mothering responsibilities. In this case, the system fails to see motherhood as a full form of participation so it needs to be accompanied by paid work or education. The schemes that are meant to support active participation and inclusion actually lead to exclusion. The interviews conducted with elderly citizens revealed how bureaucratic government terminology (e.g., active citizenship, participation, informal care and voluntary work) had little relevance to them because they were already active in society but used different languages to describe this. Elderly volunteers refer to their activities as spending time in a meaningful way, having fun while helping others or sharing their knowledge and experience with others. The political jargon of participation is far from the everyday language and activities of elderly people, and hence creates a gap between policy(makers) and citizens.

2.3.2  Redefining Roles and Responsibilities at a Local Level Local authorities are faced with the dilemma of fulfilling their new role and shaping their working methods at a time when the measuring results and monitoring local developments reign. Policy can no longer be developed from behind a desk. Policymakers are compelled to visit neighbourhoods and interact with residents, care and social workers, social entrepreneurs and other civil servants involved in neighbourhoods. This context has led to the creation of bottom-up instruments, such as the Care Capacity Monitor, and the creation of new working methods, such as social district teams. These embody the government’s promise of proximity to local communities. These new instruments and methods, as well as the insights they provide, greatly rely on policymakers’ knowledge and capacity to ensure that local actions lead to participation rather than stigmatisation. Social workers have an important role to play in this situation because changes in local interventions not only affect policy but also social practice. The social work professional’s presence in monitoring and support measures is an opportunity for all those involved to gain a better understanding of the socioeconomic components that make up Dutch neighbourhoods. Their role in this process can offer social workers a way to redefine themselves as vital local partners in the development of local activities, i.e., as experts in the social functioning and social quality of local communities. Having said that, for social district teams, applying new policy, taking on a new role and working in a new way is a complex struggle. These professionals are addressing requests for support in line with current policy concepts, however, this is difficult if policy is ill-suited to professional practice. The policy focus on self-­ reliance is being pressed upon professionals and citizens alike. In practice, socially vulnerable people often lack the ability to ask for help and are therefore overlooked

38

M. J. Freitas et al.

by social district teams. The policy concepts and rigid frameworks which social professionals are bound by are incompatible with their work; they adversely affect the very citizens that social professionals want to support.

2.3.3  Is Social Work an Instrument of the State? In line with the goals of decentralisation, social workers are executing local policies and formulating strategies that urge people to participate and become self-reliant. Regardless of whether it is a home visit as part of an activating programme, approaching people based on previously established contacts, organising job training schemes or workshops, etc., all interventions are aimed at encouraging people to participate in their local environment. While some of these strategies are effective, they can be patronising; furthermore, by targeting and categorising certain groups in society, they also stigmatise those groups. There is nothing inherently wrong with participation as a strategic concept. However, social professionals and citizens alike have to comply with the standards set by the local authorities where they live and work—and standards often vary. This makes it difficult to adapt forms of participation to the lifeworlds of those whose participation social workers want to support. The more social workers are deemed to be part of the system of promoting the participation society, the greater the risk that they will overlook the fact that promoting their clients’ self-reliance also means supporting each individuals’ drive, talent and potential. Moreover, enjoyment and fulfilment are also building blocks towards inclusion.

2.3.4  Self-Reliance: Damned if You Do, Damned if You Don’t The paradox of participation lies in the existence of norms and structures that are aimed at enabling economic participation but which in fact exclude some groups. Citizens are being singled out as special groups with special needs or are seen as problems requiring a different approach. However, many citizens prefer to emphasise their similarities to general society or to simply be left alone and allowed to live without (a moral) obligation to participate in the ways prescribed by the government. The current obligation to participate places the greatest burden on the most vulnerable in society. Although social professionals offer support, this primarily targets policy purposes and norms rather than the needs and wishes of those receiving assistance. The experiences of social district teams highlight how the government policies of autonomy and self-reliance simply do not reflect the type of support people relate to; they are accustomed to professionals taking the initiative to establish a support or service relationship. Professionals also struggle with this disparity and are looking for ways to reach citizens who need support but do not actively seek it.

2  Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Netherlands

39

What does self-reliance really mean? Does asking (or not asking) for help make you self-reliant? Self-reliance is not synonymous with autonomy; while every person is an autonomous individual, no one is entirely self-reliant. Moreover, there will always be people who need care and who are unable to arrange that care for themselves. In an inclusive society, care is not a form of kindness bestowed upon individuals: it is a universal right.

2.3.5  Closing Remarks Whether the move towards an inclusive society in the Netherlands—through the participation society—is actually leading to a more genuine citizen-centred society remains debatable (Van Dam, 2018). While theoretically, local democracies may be thriving, participation has become a compulsory standard for receiving care. This can potentially lead to new forms of social injustice and the further disengagement of vulnerable people who fail to meet that standard. This can lead to apathy and neglect in society by creating the belief that an inability to participate is the fault of the individual (Van Vliet, Duyvendak, Boonstra, & Plemper, 2004). In social work, participation is a principle founded on equality and on the idea that every human being matters. The term participation is by no means new in Dutch social work, however, its use in the current policy discourse has created the paradoxes presented in this chapter. It seems we need to be reminded that an inclusive society does not mean all people are expected to participate in every possible way, and that we must acknowledge that participation happens (best) when it is supported and allowed to flourish. An inclusive society requires an understanding of the ­lifeworlds of those we would like to see participate, for this is where an individual makes sense of the world.

References Arts, J., & Van Den Berg, M. (2019). Pedagogies of optimism: Teaching to ‘look forward’ in activating welfare programmes in the Netherlands. Critical Social Policy, 39(1), 66–86. Bannink, D., & Ossewaarde, R. (2012). Decentralization: New modes of governance and administrative responsibility. Administration & Society, 44(5), 595–624. Boer, N., & van der Lans, J. (2011). Burgerkracht: de toekomst van het sociaal werk in Nederland. Den Haag: Raad voor Maatschappelijke Ontwikkeling. Retrieved March 11, 2020, from https://www.raadrvs.nl/documenten/publicaties/2011/04/01/burgerkracht.-de-toekomst-vanhet-sociaal-werk-in-nederland Brandt, M. (2012, December 17). Sjekkies en bier in het kraambed. Dagblad de Limburger, p. A10. Bredewold, F. H. (2014). Lof der oppervlakkigheid: Contact tussen mensen met een verstandelijke of psychiatrische beperking en buurtbewoners. Amsterdam: Van Gennep.

40

M. J. Freitas et al.

Bredewold, F. H., Kampen, T., Verplanke, L., Tonkens, E., & Duyvendak, J. (2016). Een mooie gedachte: wat professionals denken over zelfredzaamheid en wat ze vervolgens (niet) doen. Amsterdam; Utrecht: Universiteit van Amsterdam; Universiteit voor Humanistiek. De Groot, R., Hoogenboezem, C., Huzen, J., Van Lier, L., & Van Staalduinen, I. (2015). Voorlichting, hulp en opvang aan tienermoeders in beeld. Gouda: Kennis en adviesbureau JSO. Dudevszky, S., Lohman, S., De la Rie, S., & Van Twist, E. (2012). Jonge moeders maken de toekomst! Rotterdam: Hogeschool van Rotterdam. Duyvendak, J. W. (2015, July 04). We leven in on-sociologische tijden. Tijdschrift voor Sociale Vraagstukken. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://www.socialevraagstukken.nl/we-levenin-on-sociologische-tijden/ Ferguson, C. (2008). Promoting social integration. Report Commissioned by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Background Paper presented at the Expert Group Meeting on Promoting Social Integration, Helsinki. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from http:// www.gsdrc.org/docs/open/se6.pdf Heerlen, G. (2003). Kadernota integraal beleid voor ouderen. Heerlen. Heerlen, G. (2013, April). Senioren zijn onze zilveren kracht. Stadskrant Heerlen. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from http://www.4en5meiheerlen.nl/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Stadskrantapril-2013.pdf Hesdahl, B., & Sollet, O. (2011). Transitieplan Voor Elkaar in Parkstad. Gemeentelijke Gezondheidsdienst Zuid-Limburg. Retrieved March 17, 2020, from http://docplayer.nl/1067 1232-Transitieplan-voor-elkaar-in-parkstad-deeltransities.html Hospers, G., & Reverda, N. (2012). Krimp, he nieuwe denken: bevolkingsdaling in theorie en praktijk. Amsterdam: Boom Lemma. Inspectie, S. Z. W. (2014). Uitvoering van de Wwb voor jongeren. Ministerie van Sociale Zaken en Werkgelegenheid. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://www.inspectieszw.nl/binaries/ inspectieszw/documenten/publicaties/2014/12/15/uitvoering-van-de-wwb-voor-jongeren/ Uitvoering-van-de-WWB-voor-jongeren-%2818-27jaar%29_tcm335-363391.pdf Jager-Vreugdenhil, M. (2012). Nederland participatieland? De ambitie van de Wet maatschappelijke ondersteuning (Wmo) en de praktijk in buurten, mantelzorgrelaties en kerken. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. Joppke, C., & Morawska, E. (Eds.). (2014). Toward assimilation and citizenship: Immigrants in liberal nation-states. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Keuzenkamp, S. (2015, March 28). Onderzoek naar wijkteams komt helaas nauwelijks van de grond. Tijdschrift voor Sociale Vraagstukken. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://www. socialevraagstukken.nl/maak-het-niet-te-ingewikkeld/ Koster, M. (2014). Bridging the gap in the Dutch participation society: New spaces of governance, brokers, and informal politics. Etnofoor, 26(2), 49–64. Kruiter, A. J., Bredewold, F. H., & Ham, M. R. (2016). Hoe de verzorgingsstaat verbouwd wordt. Kroniek van een verandering. Amsterdam: Van Gennep. Kunneman, H.  P. (2007). Sociaal werk als laboratorium voor normatieve professionalisering. Ethische Perspectiven, 2(17), 92–107. Linders, L. (2010). De betekenis van nabijheid, een onderzoek naar informele zorg in een volksbuurt. Den Haag: SDU-Uitgevers. Louali, S., Potting, M., Reverda, N., & Ročak, M. (2016). Zorgkracht van wijken in Sittard-Geleen: De wijken Stadbroek, Geleen-Noord, Holtum en Buchten onderzocht. Maastricht: Lectoraat Sociale Integratie - Zuyd Hogeschool. Ministerie van Volksgezondheid Welzijn en Sport. (2015). Plan van Aanpak. Implementatie VN-verdrag. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://zoek.officielebekendmakingen.nl/blg530744.pdf Nederland, T., Noordhuizen, B., & Van Dijk, M. (2016). Jongeren buiten beeld’ achter de cijfers. Utrecht: Verwey-Jonker Instituut. Oudhof, M., Zoon, M., & Van der Steege, M. (2013). Wat werkt bij jonge moeders? Utrecht: Nederlands Jeugdinstituut.

2  Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Netherlands

41

Pennix, K. (2010). Zin in meedoen. Werkzame principes voor het stimuleren van vrijwillige inzet van mensen in de derde levensfase. Movisie. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https:// www.movisie.nl/sites/movisie.nl/files/publication-attachment/Zin%20in%20meedoen%20 %5BMOV-222125-0.3%5D.pdf Peters, K., van Stipdonk, V., & Castenmiller, P. (2014). Verkennin van lokale democratie in Nederland. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://kennisopenbaarbestuur.nl/media/62999/ verkenning-van-lokale-democratie-in-nederland.pdf Pommer, E., & Boelhouwer, J.  R. (2017). Overall rapportage sociaal domein 2016. Sociaal Cultureel Planbureau. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://www.scp.nl/dsresource? objectid=f56c01a2-2268-4728-a410-59bd1de4067d&type=org Pruim, E. (2016). Eerste reacties van sociale professionals op de transitie. In L. Linders, D. Feringa, M. Potting, & M. Jager-Vreugdenhil (Eds.), Tussen regels en vertrouwen: Veranderende rollen in de verzorgingsstaat (pp. 161–172). Amsterdam: Van Gennep. Raad Voor Openbaar Bestuur. (2010). Vertrouwen op democratie. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://www.raadopenbaarbestuur.nl/documenten/publicaties/2010/02/17/vertrouwenop-democratie Rapp, C. A., & Goscha, R. J. (2011). The strengths model: A recovery-oriented approach to mental health services. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Reverda, N. (2014). Population decline and ageing in Europe. In S. Hessle (Ed.), Human rights and social equality: Challenges for social work (pp. 51–58). Farnham: Ashgate. Scheffers, M. (2015). Sterk met een vitaal netwerk: empowerment en de sociaal netwerkmethodiek. Bussum: Uitgeverij Coutinho. Sniekers, M. (2015). Vrouwelijkheid en de vanzelfsprekendheid van nutteloze decoratie. In S.  Dudink & L.  Plate (Eds.), Mythen van gender: Essays voor Willy Jansen (pp.  189–193). Nijmegen: Uitgeverij Vantilt. Sniekers, M. (2016). Jonge moeders: Verantwoordelijk en zelfstandig. Amsterdam: Van Gennep. Sniekers, M. (2017). Defining dreams: Young mothers’ agency in constructions of space. Social & Cultural Geography, 19(8), 1073–1096. Sniekers, M., & Van den Brink, M. (2018). Navigating norms and structures: Young mothers’ pathways to economic independence. Journal of Youth Studies, 22(2), 187–202. https://doi.org /10.1080/13676261.2018.1492102 Sprinkhuizen, A., & Scholte, M. (2012). De sociale kwestie hervat: De Wmo en sociaal werk in transitie. Houten: Bohn Stafleu van Loghum. Tonkens, E. (2003). Mondige burgers, getemde professionals. In Marktwerking, vraagsturing en professionaliteit in de publieke sector. Utrecht: Uitgeverij NIZW. Tonkens, E., & De Wilde, M. (2013). Als meedoen pijn doet: affectief burgerschap in de wijk. Amsterdam: Van Gennep. United Nations General Assembly. (2006, December 13). Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. Resolution adopted by the General Assembly. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/generalassembly/docs/ globalcompact/A_RES_61_106.pdf Van Arum, S., & Schoorl, R. (2016). Sociale (wijk) teams in beeld. Stand van zaken na de decentralisaties (najaar 2015). Movisie. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://www.planmovisie. nl/sites/movisie.nl/files/publication-attachment/Sociale-wijkteams-in-beeld%20%5BMOV9164168-1.1%5D.pdf Van Bochove, M., Tonkens, E., & Verplanke, L. (2014). Kunnen we dat (niet) aan vrijwilligers overlaten? Nieuwe verhoudingen tussen vrijwilligers en professionals in zorg en welzijn. Den Haag; Amsterdam: Platform31; Universiteit van Amsterdam. Van Dam, J. (2018, September 18). Participatiesamenleving 5 jaar: tijd voor heroriëntatie? Sociale Vraagstukken. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://www.socialevraagstukken.nl/ vijf-jaar-participatiesamenleving-decentralisatie-beloofde-nabijheid-maar-bracht-tekorten/ Van den Boom, R.  W. (2015). Die kleine is alles voor mij. [Documentary]. Hilversum: KRO-­ NCRV 2DOC.

42

M. J. Freitas et al.

Van der Laan, G. (2006). Maatschappelijk werk als ambacht: inbedding en belichaming. Amsterdam: Sociaal Wetenschapsplan. Van der Want, H. (2014). Vier handen op één buik. [Television series]. Hilversum: BNN-VARA. Van der Zwaard, J. (2012). Meedoen versus zelf doen. Zin en onzin van stads-, buurt-en straatburgerschap. In R. Gowricharn, D. Postma, & S. Trienekens (Eds.), Geleefd burgerschap. Van eenheidsdwang naar ruimte voor verschil en vitaliteit (pp. 154–168). Amsterdam: SWP. Van Dyck, C. (2013, March 16). Niet gepland, maar wel gewenst. Dagblad de Limburger, B7. Van Leeuwen-Den Dekker, P., & Poll, A. (2016). Leefgebiedenwijzer: Versterken van eigen kracht van cliënten. Movisie. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://www.movisie.nl/publicatie/ leefgebiedenwijzer Van Lieshout, M.  P. (2016). De oudere als ‘nieuwe’ vrijwilliger. In L.  Linders, D.  Feringa, M. Potting, & M. Jager-Vreugdenhil (Eds.), Tussen regels en vertrouwen: veranderende rollen in de verzorgingsstaat (pp. 43–59). Amsterdam: Uitgeverij van Gennep. Van Vliet, K., Duyvendak, J.  W., Boonstra, N., & Plemper, E. (2004). Toekomstverkenning ten behoeve van een beroepenstructuur in zorg en welzijn. Utrecht: Verwey-Jonker Instituut. Vlindt, M. (2012). Zelfregie in de Praktijk. Een kwalitatief onderzoek naar eigen regievoering van kwetsbaren in de zelfredzame samenleving (Master’s thesis). Movisie. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://www.movisie.nl/sites/movisie.nl/files/publication-attachment/Zelfregie%20 in%20de%20praktijk%20%5BMOV-178025-0.3%5D.pdf Wetenschappelijke Raad voor het Regeringsbeleid. (2017). Weten is nog geen doen. Een realistisch perspectief op zelfredzaamheid. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://www.wrr.nl/ publicaties/rapporten/2017/04/24/weten-is-nog-geen-doen Wevers, C. (2018). Kan ik daar wat aan doen? Denken over professioneel handelen in zorg en welzijn. Bussum: Coutinho. Witte, T. (2015). Beleidsleren: De wijken als landscape of action. In G. van den Luitgaarden (Ed.), Transities: Tussen hoop en vrees (pp.  13–28). Retrieved March 16, 2020, from http://www. dewijkin.nl/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/transitiestussenhoopenvrees.pdf

Chapter 3

Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Spanish Case Càndid Palacín Bartrolí, Josep María Mesquida González, Josefina Fernández Barrera, María Virginia Matulic Domandzic, Ariadna Munté Pascual, and Irene de Vicente Zueras

3.1  K  ey Actors in Inclusive Society: Public and Third Sector Roles 3.1.1  The Concept of Inclusive Society in Catalonia and Spain 3.1.1.1  Social Inequality The state has a significant impact on increasing or reducing the effects of inequality through the development and implementation of public and social policies. In Spain, measures taken in recent years have failed to prevent social exclusion. The boundaries and limitations of concepts such as exclusion and social inclusion may vary according to the particular groups considered and the space/time in which they live. Although economic factors are decisive when analysing social inequalities, they are not the only aspect to consider. Precarious labour, lack of training, limited access to housing, fragile health, migrants’ lack of official documents and the absence of social and family networks can all play a part in triggering the exclusion or ­marginalisation of particular groups. Whether individually or combined, these factors can lead to social exclusion. Poverty and Social Exclusion: an analysis of the Spanish and European reality (2004) is a study by Instituto de Gobierno y Políticas Públicas (IGOP) led by the

C. Palacín Bartrolí · J. M. Mesquida González (*) · J. Fernández Barrera · M. V. Matulic Domandzic · A. Munté Pascual · I. de Vicente Zueras Faculty of Education, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 S. Bundschuh et al. (eds.), Ambivalences of Inclusion in Society and Social Work, European Social Work Education and Practice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55446-0_3

43

44

C. Palacín Bartrolí et al.

sociologist Joan Subirats; it identifies three changes in Spain’s economic and social systems that form the basis of new processes of social exclusion: (a) The fragmentation of society, complexity (Morin, 1999) and social diversity: Examples of this are the insufficient responses to migration-related legal and administrative issues, the progressive ageing of the population along with the economic and health-related consequences of this, and difficulties incorporating new family structures. (b) The impact of the new post-industrial economy on the labour market: A decrease in labour market regulation due to capitalism, and the globalisation of the economy have led to increasingly lengthy, complex and precarious trajectories to labour market entry. These changes particularly affect young people. (c) Increasingly flexible production processes: This has led to the emergence of new, lower-quality, more precarious jobs, which have contributed to the deterioration of working conditions. Furthermore, there has been a decline in the social protection of employment sectors which, until recently, were considered stable. These production and labour market changes primarily affect young people, women and those with family responsibilities. Inequality leads to situations of exclusion; these, in turn, may be worsened by inadequate social policy, as well as difficulties encountered by social initiatives when responding to such problems. 3.1.1.2  Social Exclusion The concept of social exclusion was first referred to in France during the 1970s. In the fields of social and political science, the term was introduced in the 1980s. Social exclusion replaced poverty—a term which lacked sufficient scope—and has become an axis of European Union social policy. Social exclusion encompasses a range of situations which result from inequality, loss of social connections, disaffiliation, disconnection or social marginalisation. The term is referred to both in the academic world, and in political and public debates. According to Subirats (2004), social exclusion can be understood as: A concrete situation resulting from a dynamic process of accumulation, overlap and/or combination of different factors of social disadvantage or vulnerability that can affect individuals or groups, creating a situation of impossibility or intense difficulty accessing the mechanisms for personal development, social and community integration, and pre-existing systems of social protection (p. 22, author’s own translation).

Social exclusion is a phenomenon of structural origin; its multidimensional character and procedural nature respond to the economic and social systems that produce and reproduce it. Social exclusion arises from a chain of events reinforced or driven by inequality; it relates to situations caused by the emergence of new social fractures and a breakdown of key indicators of integration, such as participation in the labour market, social acceptance and political involvement, as well as social and

3  Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Spanish Case

45

community allegiances through family and/or social networks. Laparra and Pérez (2009) describe social exclusion as ‘a social process of a loss of integration of individuals and society, which not only includes a lack of income and distance from the labour market, but also a weakening of social ties, and a decline in social participation and social rights’ (p. 79, author’s own translation). Social exclusion is a dynamic process; there has been an increase in the number and diversity of people affected because they have difficulty accessing personal development mechanisms, social and community integration, and social protection systems. The processes of social exclusion can emerge in various aspects of life in the following domains: economic, labour, formative, social and health care, residential, relational and citizenship, as well as in relation to participation. In each of these domains, a variety of factors (individual or combined) can lead to social exclusion. There are three additional factors which are particularly relevant for understanding the phenomenon of social exclusion: age, gender and ethnicity. These factors go through the dynamics of inclusion and exclusion, reinforcing them and imprinting characteristics or elements of their own. Women, young people and migrants— especially those from developing countries—are most at risk of social exclusion. Exclusion affects many aspects of people’s lives, however, local administrations often react to problems and demands in a fragmented way. 3.1.1.3  Social Inclusion Social inclusion is related to integration, cohesion and social justice. These mechanisms ensure that all members of society enjoy equal opportunities and equal participation in all areas of life, as well as full access to the resources they need. Subirats (2004) points out that social inclusion is related to the creation of links and the reconstruction of social identities (p. 17). He describes three pillars that have an impact on inclusion: participation in the production and creation of value, political ascription and citizenship and cultural affiliation and connections to social networks. These three factors interact and are ongoing. Castel (1995) describes exclusion as the end of a chain; he suggests that in order to deal with this issue, action must be taken to address the real sources of vulnerability rather than focus on those who are excluded. Fernández Prat (2009) asserts that inclusion policies should enable dignified access to commercial and production spaces (both as workers and consumers), participatory spaces for citizenship (including political participation), relational spaces and social connections (p. 50). Responses to inequality and social exclusion are still oriented towards protection and assistance in relation to the labour market. They fail to address the new realities that have emerged as a result of economic and social change, and they are influenced by the labour market. Social policies must be reconfigured to account for such new realities, otherwise they risk causing further exclusion. Moreover, the use of measurement tools should be prioritised so that a dynamic analysis of inclusion and exclusion factors can be performed; this will provide policy planners with valuable

46

C. Palacín Bartrolí et al.

information and enable them to develop more effective inclusion policies with a preventive orientation.

3.1.2  T  he Challenges of Creating an Inclusive Society in Catalonia and Spain: Key Actors in the Public Sector Societal exclusion remains a perennial problem in Spain; according to the quality of life survey carried out by the National Statistics Institute (Instituto Nacional de Estadística [INE]) in 2014, 22.2% of Spaniards are at risk of poverty (according to the more detailed AROPE indicator, the figure is 28.6%). Those at a higher risk of marginalisation include immigrants, unemployed young people and senior citizens with meagre pensions. According to the same INE survey, the rate of child poverty is particularly critical: this is almost 30% (INE, 2014). Women are more vulnerable to social exclusion than men, particularly if they are in precarious employment or are single parents. Finally, 12.3% of employed people live below the poverty threshold: this is the third highest rate in the EU (the average is 9%). Furthermore, a survey on living conditions in Catalonia conducted by the Statistical Institute of Catalonia (Institut d’Estadística de Catalunya [IDESCAT], 2015) found that 23.5% of the population were at risk of poverty or social exclusion (AROPE rate). This rate, which was 2.5% lower than the previous year, includes people who are below the risk of the poverty threshold (19%), those living in households with a low work intensity (8.8%) and people suffering from severe material deprivation (6.7%). The combined impact of economic difficulties (due to rising unemployment rates along with salary and benefit cuts) and austerity measures (which affect health care, education, social services and disability support programmes) have exacerbated marginalisation. The situation is better with regard to other areas of discrimination, which are not associated with poverty, particularly gender equality within institutions and gay rights. In Spain, a new law on equal opportunities and social inclusion for people with disabilities (Real Decreto Legislativo por el que se aprueba el Texto Refundido de la Ley General de derechos de las personas con discapacidad y de su inclusión social, 2013) was eventually passed in November 2013, however, this significantly reduced welfare provision for the care of dependent people. The National Action Plan on Social Inclusion for the Kingdom of Spain (2013–2016), which was published by the Ministry of Health, Social Services and Equality 2014, is based on the following three social pillars: • Active policies for a more inclusive labour market targeting the groups which face the greatest barriers; • Assistance via minimum income policies that ensure basic needs are covered; • Access to quality public services.

3  Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Spanish Case

47

The challenge of active inclusion is to incorporate other strategies, which only partially focus on the issues of exclusion and poverty (such as policies directed at the labour market) or which are purely assistance based. In contrast, this new strategy aims to combine labour insertion with support for the most disadvantaged groups by maintaining social protection levels that allow people a decent standard of living along with greater social and economic cohesion. In Catalonia, the Action plan for the fight against poverty and for social inclusion in Catalonia 2015–2016 (Government of Catalonia, 2014) was developed using the guidelines provided by the Advisory Council for Sustainable Development, Government of Catalonia (CADS). In 2018, CADS published recommendations for creating an inclusive society which facilitates and supports the social, economic and political inclusion of all people, irrespective of their age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion and economic or any other status. The report concluded that the main challenges in terms of social inclusion are as follows: • To find a balance between the development of measures for direct assistance and the introduction of medium and long-term structural measures and strategies of a more preventive nature. • To redirect public policies, traditionally segmented along thematic and sector lines, towards a more cross-cutting approach, which can affect various areas of action, such as social services, employment, education, housing, health and justice, making the individual the centre of attention. Advance towards more community-­based care models (CADS, 2018, p. 179). The Plan for Social Inclusion Barcelona 2012–2015 shows the extent of efforts to establish Barcelona as an inclusive society. As described above, there have been a number of public sector measures to address social inclusion, however, the third sector also plays a significant role in this context. There is frequently collaboration between the public administration and non-profit organisations; according to Vernis (2004), this is leading to a relational society.

3.1.3  T  he Role of the Third Sector and NGOs in Establishing a More Inclusive Society The Oxford dictionary defines the third sector as the part of an economy or society comprising non-governmental and non-profit-making organisations or associations (Oxford University Press, 2019); these include charities, as well as voluntary and community groups. Although these organisations work separately from the public and private sectors, they generally receive funding from both sectors. In Catalonia, the increasing importance of the third sector in recent years has led to changes in concepts and responsibilities within the public sector. The third sector has thus contributed to the transformation of the welfare state.

48

C. Palacín Bartrolí et al.

In addition, new social needs have emerged and these require greater flexibility and closer proximity to users. Moreover, some segments of the population have shown an increased desire to participate in solving social problems—particularly at a local level. This has led to greater reflection on the scope of representative democracy and a rethinking of citizens’ rights and responsibilities. These factors have helped to draw attention to the social sector and have increased its social relevance (Castiñeira & Vidal, 2002). In Spain, many third sector organisations worked in collaboration with the European Anti-Poverty Network Spain (EAPN-ES) to develop an important document proposing social inclusion strategies for the year 2020 (EAPN-ES, 2010). In Catalonia, there are two significant umbrella organisations working towards a more inclusive society: Catalonian organisations for social action (Entitats Catalanes d’Acció Social [ECAS]) and the Catalonian third sector table (Taula d’entitats del Tercer Sector Social de Catalunya). ECAS is a federation of Catalonian social assistance organisations, which primarily work with people who are (or are at risk of becoming) socially isolated. Efforts by ECAS to organise the sector and the direct assistance provided by its member organisations are part of an ongoing struggle to ensure equal opportunities for all and to create a fairer and more egalitarian society (ECAS, n.d.). The goal of ECAS is to bring together a range of projects and programmes which facilitate social inclusion, to support the equal rights of marginalised groups and to ensure the full participation and welfare of all citizens by creating a society based on commitment and joint responsibility. ECAS was established in 2003 when several social networks operating in Catalonia joined up to create a forum for dialogue, coordination and the exchange of ideas. It also encompasses local administrations and other social agencies. ECAS primarily focuses on representing and lobbying for the interests of affiliated organisations (ECAS, n.d.). Its members are united by similar issues, experiences and projects; the ECAS mission is to bring together their views, ideas and proposals and to provide optimum support to member organisations. Furthermore, ECAS promotes social welfare—with a particular focus on those at risk of social isolation— and the effective implementation of projects and programmes. As a reference point for social organisations, ECAS welcomes proposals from its members and participates in the process of designing and implementing fair social policies. The organisation’s involvement with the government, public institutions and other social agents, both public and private, enables the development of initiatives which support affiliates in achieving their objectives. ECAS furthers a model of social construction shared by administrations and civil society; it acts as a mediator for social tertiary organisations and facilitates cooperation. The Catalonian third sector table (referred to in this chapter as the taula), on the other hand, is an institution which represents most social organisations in Catalonia; these include 35 federations and many third sector organisations operating in the social sector. The taula brings together and represents more than 3000 non-profit social organisations. Founded in 2003 on the initiative of leading social sector

3  Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Spanish Case

49

organisations and federations, one of the organisation’s key aims is to increase and support social inclusion (Taula del Tercer Sector social de Catalunya, n.d.). The taula’s members are made up of associations, foundations, social initiatives, cooperatives and companies which offer labour market integration programmes. These organisations support and protect the social rights of diverse groups including children and families, young people, immigrants, the elderly, people with disabilities (intellectual, mental, physical or sensory), drug addicts, the long-term unemployed and homeless people. The impact of the work carried out by third sector organisations in this field is evident from the case studies discussed in this chapter. Such organisations aim to promote and maintain social advancement in Catalonia to ensure genuine equality, social rights and quality of life for all. This takes place in the context of an advanced democracy that recognises, encourages and strengthens the contribution of the third sector to social progress, as well as to promoting the participation, responsibility and active engagement of all citizens. These organisations primarily focus on advocacy and dialogue with institutions in order to promote the continuous improvement of third sector entities in Catalonia, and to recognise their achievements in terms of empowerment and skills development, as well as their social impact on the sector as a whole. By promoting the values of solidarity and civic engagement with the most vulnerable groups in society, the taula addresses all citizens and encourages both associations and individuals to actively participate in defining and developing social policies. Social organisations are often an engine for social change and they aim to create a collective future which guarantees and maintains the social rights of all citizens. The taula works towards raising awareness, providing education about values, empowering organisations and acknowledging the work they do; it also creates a space for public participation to realise and expand civil and social rights. This work facilitates social cohesion and promotes a society which guarantees its citizens full rights and freedoms. Despite the significance and potential of third sector organisations, there are also shortcomings, particularly in terms of financing. Although the third sector is partially funded by private contributions, it is largely dependent on public funding sources. Moreover, some third sector entities support themselves through their own trade activities, such as selling services. Vernis (2004) suggests that as a result of this, third sector entities have become hybrid organisations as, in some cases, they provide outsourced services for public administrations, hence assuming a public role. Third sector organisations may support both general social interests or particular sectors; their roles may be community-based or more commercial and could even involve collaborating with companies to acquire funding. Despite the challenges these organisations face, both in terms of day-to-day practicalities and professional social work practice, their activities play a vital role in advocating and developing a more inclusive society.

50

C. Palacín Bartrolí et al.

3.2  C  ase Studies: Research on Four Disadvantaged Groups in Barcelona This section looks at four different research projects which took place between 2012 and 2017; three were carried out by the Social Work Department of the University of Barcelona (UB) and one by the Sociology Department at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB). The research focused on four disadvantaged groups: homeless people, migrants, gay men aged over 50 and Roma migrant women. Despite the differences between these groups, common elements were identified. This section briefly describes each study and discusses the findings in relation to the social inclusion of each of the four groups; in addition, a common nexus is identified. Finally, the role of social work in supporting the inclusion of these disadvantaged groups is considered in relation to the research.

3.2.1  Homelessness The first research project (UB1) looked at processes of social inclusion for homeless people in the city of Barcelona. The research involved collecting life stories and evaluating the social support provided (Matulič, 2015). The aim of the research was to examine and evaluate the social inclusion processes of homeless people associated with seven social organisations in a network of support organisations for the homeless in Barcelona (Xarxa d’acollida de les persones sense llar, XAPSLL). Through interviews with homeless people and social professionals, the research evaluated the effectiveness of measures aimed at increasing social inclusion. A qualitative methodology was implemented based on the life stories of 12 men and women involved with the social organisations and 27 in-depth interviews with social professionals (social workers and community workers) who have supported them.

3.2.2  Migrants The second research project (UB2) addresses the psychosocial impact of migration (Palacín, 2015) and was also carried out by the Department of Social Work at the University of Barcelona. The research explores the social phenomenon of migration from two perspectives: migrants and social workers who often come into contact with them. The theoretical framework applied the following range of disciplines: psychoanalysis (with the concepts of the imaginary and mourning), psychology (especially the notion of stress, which is linked to psychosomatic symptoms), sociology (including the concepts of integration, vulnerability and disaffiliation in relation to the social spaces where migratory trajectories take place) and developments

3  Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Spanish Case

51

in the field of social work. The methodology used in this research was qualitative and applied the following techniques: case studies, in-depth interviews about migrants’ trajectories and discussions with groups of social work professionals. The research examined six case studies, 14 interviews with non-EU immigrants and two group discussions. The first group (GD1) involved social workers who work with migrants and are experts in this field. The second group (GD2) was made up of social professionals who do not work with migrants or are less involved in this field.

3.2.3  Gay Men Aged over 50 Years The third research project (UB3) entitled Gay men aged over 50 years in Barcelona: Life trajectories, social situations, collective action and social work (Mesquida, 2017) was also conducted by the Department of Social Work at the University of Barcelona. It examines the social situation of older gay men and considers circumstances that can lead to the social vulnerability of this group. The research also examines the community responses established by this social group and proposes a compatible model of social work practice on the basis of the findings. There has so far been limited research on this social group. This study used the following data from quantitative and qualitative procedures to gain a broad perspective: an online survey completed by 208 gay men aged over 50; three group discussions involving lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) rights activists from different associations, LGBT people aged over 50, and social services professionals; in-depth interviews with 10 social work and sexual diversity experts; biographical interviews with seven gay men aged over 65 and observations of individuals carried out over a 7 year period.

3.2.4  Roma Migrant Women The fourth research project (UAB) analysed the role of Roma migrant women in gaining access to social rights in Catalonia (Munté, 2012) and was undertaken by the Department of Sociology at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. The primary objective of the study is to identify the strategies these women develop in order to gain access to social rights for themselves and their families. The starting point for the research was the social inequality and unjust situation experienced by Roma people in society, particularly in relation to gaining access to the assistance and resources that constitute the pillars of the Spanish welfare state (employment, housing, health services, social security and social services). Migrant status and gender variables exacerbate the inequality faced by members of this ethnic group. This qualitative study was developed using communicative methodology and it incorporates the voices of Roma migrant women throughout the research process. The techniques used were participant observation, 16 communicative life stories

52

C. Palacín Bartrolí et al.

and one focus group involving Roma women. In order to evaluate the testimonies of the Roma migrant women, six social professionals with extensive experience of working with Roma migrants (as social workers, teachers and intermediaries) also participated in the project.

3.2.5  I nclusive Society: Key Factors Affecting the Target Groups This section is based on the findings of the research projects outlined above; it refers to a range of theoretical frameworks and different collectives representing disadvantaged groups. Several categories were agreed on with the aim of identifying a common nexus; this would make it possible to work collaboratively, and to compare and contrast the findings of the four research projects. 3.2.5.1  Categories for Comparing Research Based on the theories of Castel (1992, 1997), trajectory was designated as the first category for comparing the research findings. An inclusive society depends on several aspects of social structure and this determines the three zones in social space defined by Castel in relation to social divisions: affiliation (or insertion), vulnerability and disaffiliation (or marginalisation). An individual’s position within or ability to move between these three zones is influenced by their experiences and may be related to the level of social support received, stability of relationships, trajectories, established ties and the biographies of the individual research subjects. The second category specified is the concept of social links (Subirats, 2010). In this chapter, the concept is understood as the creation of social bonds which allow the subjects to be recognised as accomplished social actors. The third theoretical nexus or category refers to the notion of the imaginary (Castoriadis, 2004) as a function that enables organisation and confers meaning to social facts. It refers to both the prospects of the subjects involved, as well as to the social image constructed around specific groups (Cabrera, 1998; Hancock, 2002). However, such images can potentially lead to stereotyping and social stigmatisation. The fourth and final category relates to the participation of the groups involved in the research. Social participation implies that citizens are closely involved in the economic, social, cultural and political processes that affect their lives (Martínez & CIEM, 1997).

3  Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Spanish Case

53

3.2.5.2  Paths to Affiliation, Vulnerability and Disaffiliation Life on the Streets: Extreme Deprivation Homelessness exemplifies extreme poverty and social exclusion that combines multiple factors (structural, relational and individual) which can lead to life on the streets (Muñoz & Vázquez, 1998; Sarasa & Sales, 2009). There are several barriers to accessing social rights in the process of social disaffection; these include a lack of access to secure, well-maintained housing and to medical care, difficulties finding or keeping a job, and low levels of education (European Commission, 2014). Research indicates that the longer a homeless person spends living on the streets, the greater the effort required to reintegrate that individual (Homeless in Europe, 2008). According to Castel (1992), economic situation, social relations and the meaning of life are the aspects which link individuals to their social environment. Whether an individual remains integrated depends on the strength of these three aspects and the duration of an individual‘s exclusion (Linares, 2001, p. 54). There are two social care models in the city of Barcelona: an escalating model, which is based on a logic of access to social services as a key social integration process, and the Housing First model, which focuses on the right to housing as the key to preventing homelessness. Adapting services and interventions to address social exclusion due to homelessness is one of the main challenges faced by organisations and entities operating in the city (Matulič, Cabré, & García, 2016). A plan to put an end to homelessness in Barcelona by 2020 was approved in 2016; this was a pioneering project in Spain and set City Council objectives to combat the phenomenon in the medium and long term. In preparation for this plan, the City Council undertook a consultation and deliberation process involving municipal service professionals, and a group of people who have experienced or are still experiencing homelessness and have used services for the homeless. This group provided ideas for improving care services based on their own experiences. The results of the research carried out with the homeless community in Barcelona suggest that the key elements involved in the processes of social inclusion are linked to structural factors (including the coordination of programmes and activities focusing on housing, education and employment), institutional factors (which play an important role in the comprehensive social and proactive support provided by professionals), relational factors (focused on family and social support) and staff (who have a significant impact on the resilience of individuals’ inclusion processes). These results confirm the assertions of several authors regarding protective factors which help prevent homelessness (Cabrera & Rubio, 2008; Renes, Fuentes, Ruíz, & Jaraíz, 2007; Roca, 2006; Subirats, 2004; Tezanos, 2004; Vidal, 2011).

54

C. Palacín Bartrolí et al.

Vulnerability Factors for Older Gay Men The situation of older gay men in relation to welfare and social inclusion has not been studied by gerontological disciplines in Spain or Catalonia. Several researches carried out in other countries indicate that this population group may experience vulnerability due to a combination of factors; older gay men may have cut off ties with their families, they may be childless and they are more likely to experience isolation and loneliness (Guasp, 2011; Higgins et al., 2011). These socio-familial factors play a major role in the context of a Mediterranean social welfare regime; families are considered the most significant agents in terms of social welfare provision (Esping-Andersen, 1990). In addition, it is important to consider the impact of the institutionalised normative framework of homophobia, particularly during the Franco dictatorship and the early stages of political transition (Benito & Villagrasa, 2009; Guasch, 1991; Ugarte, 2011). With regard to the social inclusion of older gay men, the research results (UB3) highlight several issues that should be considered in relation to this group. The participants in the study generally had favourable living conditions and showed high levels of life satisfaction and participation in formal associative structures, such as LGBT associations, social entities and social services. Alongside these positive aspects, there are other factors that prevent or impede social inclusion; these include the significant impact of HIV (both in social and healthcare terms), the high number of people who report that they have mental health issues and/or who have been victims of various types of violence and negative perceptions of gerontological services due to anticipated homophobia. Disaffiliation Trajectories of Migrants and Roma Migrant Women In relation to migrants, there is a tendency to attribute social exclusion to the three zones described earlier in this chapter (Castel, 1997), however, exclusion is often caused by a combination of different factors. In the University of Barcelona study (UB2), health, in particular mental health, was perhaps the most significant aspect leading to the social exclusion of migrants. According to this research, migrants who have mental health issues should be classified as marginalised, rather than vulnerable to exclusion. Furthermore, experiences of migration can lead to mental illness (Grinberg & Grinberg, 1996) and some research has linked mental health issues to the precarious status of migrants and the suffering this causes; this may increase the risk of schizophrenia (Selten, Cantor-Graae, & Kahn, 2007). However, health issues go hand in hand with social support, and a lack of social bonds can result in disaffiliation (Castel, 2010). Administrative issues can significantly impede migrants’ potential to develop and integrate within their social environment; furthermore, a lack of legal status can have a major impact on the extent of social exclusion. If a migrant receives a work or residence permit—however, short-term or precarious this may be—it represents an acknowledgement of that individual’s identity and status, and it enables them to

3  Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Spanish Case

55

gain employment and access to social protection systems. Providing migrants with the necessary documents and legal status eases this situation, despite restrictions to accessing employment. There is an implicit relationship between unemployment and regular status; while a residence permit reduces the risk of disaffiliation, the fact that this status does not allow migrants to work is still a major barrier to inclusion as without a job it is difficult to gain social acceptance (Alemán & Soriano, 2014; Colectivo Ioé, 2012; Moreno & Bruquetas, 2011; Pajares, 2010). In addition, the economic crisis has led to prolonged instability, which has further hindered access to employment for migrants and hence presented an additional obstacle to inclusion. In the specific case of Roma people, there have been limited opportunities to move from the zones of vulnerability and disaffiliation to affiliation due to hostility towards and prejudice against this group. Throughout their history, Roma communities have suffered different forms of discrimination: persecution, imprisonment, social exclusion, segregation, prohibition from using their language, slavery, attempts to enforce cultural assimilation, a lack of cultural recognition and even extermination (Rizo, 2005; United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, 2008). As a result, there have recently been measures to achieve a more positive correlation between Roma ethnicity and living standards, regardless of education level or occupation (Revenga, Ringold, & Tracy, 2002). In the current political opportunity structure (Tarrow, 1994) in Spain and Catalonia, Roma men and women have more opportunities to reduce their vulnerability to exclusion than in other international contexts (European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 2018; Fundación Secretariado Gitano, 2012). Nevertheless, the level of improvement diminishes if the variables of gender (female) and citizenship status (immigrant) are added to ethnicity. Hence Roma migrant women are particularly disadvantaged and occupy low social status (Arneson, 1989; Fraser, 1997; Sen, 2000), which increases their vulnerability and the risk of disaffiliation.

3.2.6  S  ocial Links: Attachment, Identities, Recognition and Networks In the transition between affiliation and disaffiliation, the concept of attachment plays a significant role; attachment brings an individual closer to affiliation and at the same time enables them to become a social actor. The results of the research on homelessness (UB1) highlight significant elements in the social affiliation processes of homeless people. These include the recognition of rights and the recovery of social identities through supporting inclusive citizenship settings. In terms of the social inclusion of migrants, Moreno and Aierdi (2008) regard access to employment, and social and family support networks as the two axes which facilitate the inclusion of new immigrants. Hence, if one of these two elements is missing, the risk of exclusion is high. Due to Spanish Law (Ley Orgánica 4/2000, sobre derechos y libertades de los extranjeros en España y su integración

56

C. Palacín Bartrolí et al.

social, 2000), new migrants often lack access to social security protection systems. Furthermore, migrants may have difficulties obtaining a residence permit if they did not apply for this before leaving their country of origin (Pajares, 2010). Community networks, which relate to the concept of attachment, are also relevant; the presence or absence of such networks influences the inclusion or disaffiliation of an individual. Furthermore, the research results (UB2) suggest that bonds or networks may prevent an individual from becoming disaffiliated. The research found that assistance provided by people in the local community helped to reduce the adverse effects of everyday problems. Such support often requires trust and cooperation because it involves complex administrative procedures and relevant documents, such as income tax or payroll details. However, the legislation relating to migrant status (Law 4/2000, Article 30a) sustains social rejection due to irregular migrant status rather than supporting integration and facilitating regular status. Several researches have shown that Roma migrant women, who are often restricted by three exclusion factors (gender, ethnicity and migrant status), tend to form women’s solidarity networks as a strategy for gaining access to different social rights (Contreras, Munté, Prieto, & Sordé, 2012). Ties between female family members, as well as connections to other Roma women (both migrants and those with Spanish citizenship) are decisive in the processes of social inclusion and affiliation. In terms of accessing social services and improving living conditions, these ties are seen as a key channel to working with Roma women and their families. In many cases, social services fail to reach these women or the women cut themselves off due to administrative problems or conflicts and misunderstandings with social services professionals (Munté, 2012).

3.2.7  The Imaginary: Stigmatisation and Rejection Societies’ views of particular social groups are often determined by the imaginary; this can lead to the rejection, stigmatisation or recognition of certain groups. The opportunities for social participation offered by government authorities and civil society reflect this recognition and influence the level of social inclusion of particular groups. In the specific case of Roma people, authors such as Hancock have studied the social construction of images and stereotypes throughout history; Hancock (2002) refers to ‘anti-gypsyism’ and ‘Romanophobia’. These terms describe a whole range of representations and prejudices within majority societies that have been used to justify and perpetuate discrimination against Roma people. This is especially the case for Roma migrants, who have inherited a social imaginary that links them to begging, neighbourhood problems or illegal housing occupation (ASPROSOCU, 2008; Peeters, 2005). These images particularly affect Roma migrant women, who

3  Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Spanish Case

57

are linked to such negative images as using children for begging, being submissive to the men in their communities, as well as other stereotypes that lead to exclusion. Homeless people also experience stigmatisation and discrimination based on a social imaginary that questions their equal status as citizens. As Cabrera (1998) points out, throughout history, the homeless have been perceived as dangerous and uncontrollable poor people, in comparison to other forms of poverty considered more worthy of attention (p.  20). This has resulted in discrimination and human rights abuses that exacerbate social exclusion. The research (UB1) identifies stigmas related to health (mental disorders and addictions), culture and origin (including migrant status) and gender discrimination. In relation to migration, it is also important to consider migrants’ views of society in their host country. Research on this (UB2) revealed some discrepancies between migrants’ perceptions of a country before and after living there. Migrants’ idealised views about the destination country clearly relate to the (often difficult) social and economic situations in their countries of origin. Hence, the perceptions of individual migrants are based on an imaginary and a set of representations developed in their countries of origin; it is as if the idea of migration emerged from this social imaginary (Castoriadis, 2004). García and Verdú (2008) also indicate that family networks develop different approaches and representations in their countries of origin and destination countries. The imaginary is not static and is redefined in the destination country; research has shown that this is just one aspect of redefinition as migrants also redefine the expectations they have for their children (Suárez-­ Orozco & Suárez-Orozco, 2003). Host societies have various perspectives on migration and the term inclusion has little meaning without a context. From one perspective, the ideal situation (Weber, 2014) is when the host culture, continent (Grinberg & Grinberg, 1996) or dominant society (Berry, 2001) changes nothing due to the presence of immigrants. The reverse of this situation is if a host society reacts by feeling threatened and this then leads to exclusion (Retorlillo, 2009). A second perspective introduces the idea of reciprocity, which involves the acceptance of immigrants according to the psychoanalytic model of the container/contained (Grinberg & Grinberg, 1996); in this model, the non-dominant group contributes to and becomes a part of the host group and this leads to integration (Berry, 2001). Maestro (2010) argues that immigrants’ rights are based on two criteria: domestic market preferences and profitability. There is a wish for foreign workers to perform undesirable tasks; the message here is we want immigrants to do jobs that nobody else wants to do, a desire which is questionable but understandable. However, the imaginary statement is the immigrant comes to do the tasks that we do not want to do, whereby the desire is attributed to the immigrants. Migrants may come to a country seeking the best possible conditions, however, when they find themselves in a vulnerable position and need acceptance from others in order to develop an identity, the discourse of the host society becomes plausible.

58

C. Palacín Bartrolí et al.

3.2.8  Participation 3.2.8.1  Collective Interventions As stated in the European Commission (2014) report on homelessness in the EU, the social participation of homeless people is an essential element in reintegration programmes because it ‘can boost personal relationships, reduce isolation, improve people’s skills and confidence and show how to live an individual life and take responsibility for one’s decisions’ (p. 22). This approach enables people to play a significant role in the individual and social processes which they are a part of, and hence supports the development of inclusive citizenship (Llobet, Baillergeau, & Thirot, 2012). In the case of older gay men, social participation through collective responses and political influence represents a characteristic that can also be observed among the general population in this age group (Subirats, 2016). Thus, many in this age group are also involved in campaigning on other issues within other organisations. The LGBT movement in Spain, which developed with the aim of ending discriminatory laws, has moved on to a new agenda with a greater focus on social welfare and issues such as homoparental families, international protection, education and care for the elderly (Monferrer, 2010). The fact that these organisations are part of formal participation structures—such as the Barcelona Municipal LGTBI Council and the Municipal Council for the Elderly—raises the social profile and impact of this social group in relation to a diversity of issues. These range from citizens’ initiatives focusing on the needs of older citizens, to debates on how the city can provide for and support older citizens more respectfully. 3.2.8.2  The Role of the Third Sector in Relation to the Target Groups LGBT associations which focus on older people were first established in the USA; they evolved from activist movements campaigning for respect for sexual diversity and emerged from informal networks in communal spaces for LGBT people (D’Emilio, 1998). SAGE is the largest and oldest organisation dedicated to improving the lives of older LGBT adults. Founded in the USA in 1978, it advocates on issues related to LGBT ageing. SAGE offers innovative services and programmes to older LGBT people and provides training on sexual diversity for nursing homes. It also campaigns to increase the visibility of older LGBT people (SAGE, 2019). In Spain, LGBT rights organisations first began to organise health, education and social services in the 1990s at the time of the AIDS crisis (Vélez-Pelligrini, 2008). These groups, which were initially set up to campaign for improvements in social policy, also began to develop their own social and care services. They established social and educational activities in schools and care homes, preventive campaigns, and medical and nursing consultations.

3  Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Spanish Case

59

Fundación 26 de Diciembre in Madrid and the Enllaç Foundation in Barcelona are two leading organisations which provide individual support and social activities for LGBT people, as well as campaigning to increase the visibility and acceptance of this population group. Enllaç has a strong media presence and also organises pioneering training on cultural competencies relating to sexual diversity for social and healthcare professionals who work with older people. These programmes seek to improve professionals’ abilities to respond to the needs of LGBT people (Cross, Bazron, Dennis, & Isaacs, 1989; Messinger, 2006) and they make a valuable contribution in social and health-related contexts. LGBT people continue to bring about social change and influence social policy as they grow older. Such campaigns are part of a wider social movement questioning the roles attributed to senior citizens (Subirats, 2016) and they take place alongside the general fight against funding cuts in social and gerontological services. LGBT support organisations for older people have members from all walks of life, from company directors and professionals to voluntary workers and students. In Barcelona, gay support associations, such as Casal Lambda or Grupo de Amigos Gays de Barcelona, also offer programmes and activities specifically for elderly citizens. In terms of support for the homeless in Barcelona, most assistance is organised by third sector entities. These organisations play an essential role in supporting vulnerable people, and aiding their recovery processes and social inclusion. Some NGOs, such as Arrels Foundation, Sant Joan de Déu or Filles de la Caritat, have worked in this field for over 30 years and play a key role in fighting homelessness in the city (Matulič, 2015). In 2005, the Homeless People Care Network (Xarxa d’atenció a Persones Sense Llar, XAPSLL) was created in Barcelona; its aim is ‘to strengthen the city’s capacity for action and to accompany homeless people through the process of recovering full personal autonomy and re-establishing their interpersonal and social ties’ (Barcelona City Council, 2017, p. 8). The network’s 38 entities and organisations provide assistance for the homeless, and support inclusion and rehabilitation processes. The network is encouraged and promoted by Barcelona City Council within the framework of the Citizens’ Agreement for an Inclusive Barcelona (Acord Ciutadà per una Barcelona Inclusiva). The network’s main objectives are: to raise awareness about homelessness, to collect and analyse data on homelessness, to improve services and resources, to define care models and to facilitate information exchange between social services and social professionals (Barcelona City Council, 2014, p. 7f.). In relation to migrants, extensive support is provided by the third sector. One of the main reasons for the major role of third sector organisations is their proximity to users (Vernis, 2004) and the fact that local authorities are reluctant to take care of people whose immigration status is unclear (Palacín, 2017). Barcelona’s social entities are faced with the challenge of developing new intervention methods and updating existing ones. Programmes must also be adapted to respond to the range of social exclusion processes which lead to homelessness. The Housing First model is a recent example of how changes have been implemented through the active

60

C. Palacín Bartrolí et al.

p­ articipation of third sector organisations and a commitment to preventing extreme housing exclusion (Fundació, 2016). Social organisations need to establish reflection processes to evaluate their programmes and activities, strengthen their impact and increase their openness to innovation (Navarro, 2003; Renes et al., 2007).

3.3  S  ocial Work and Inclusion in Relation to the Target Groups 3.3.1  Migration Issues: Fluctuations in Care Settings The results of the migration research project (UB2) show that it is relevant for social workers to incorporate biographies, traditions and customs into care settings, and that this creates an environment of reciprocity (Richmond, 1995). Extended contact with migrants facilitates interactive relational processes; this enables an assistance relationship to incorporate an individual’s lifeworld and it encourages a logic of mutual inclusion (Mata, 2009). In certain contexts, the care framework can become a facilitator helping migrants to deal with loss and to redefine their expectations in their new environment. The mechanism of identification (Freud, 1984; Grinberg, 1985; Klein, 1988) is frequently used to gain an understanding of others. This theory was supported by the expert group (GD1); rather than focusing on asymmetrical knowledge about another person, social workers use their own inclinations, emotions and ideas to overcome their anguish and discomfort, and to gain a better understanding of service users. Intercultural mediation, unlike conflict mediation, does not necessarily involve conflict (Munuera & Munuera, 2007); language difficulties aside, there is a presupposition that an external mediator is needed to enable people from different cultures to understand each other. This approach regards diversity as a barrier that can only be overcome with the assistance of support tools. Despite the widespread use of intercultural mediators, their function is not clearly defined and their effectiveness is questionable. Rather than showing the efficacy of intercultural mediation, requests from social work services for support from intercultural mediators suggest that other social work tools are insufficient for effective communication. The expert group (GD1) described a variety of ways in which social workers can relate to and understand their clients more successfully; intercultural mediation was not mentioned as a solution. The non-expert discussion group (GD2) questioned the need for this kind of mediation. In the primary care sector, something akin to rejection emerges, especially in relation to the binary of regular/irregular migrant status. If a migrant with irregular status is in need of help, social services are faced with an ethical dilemma: on the one hand, they are expected to abide by the law, on the other hand, they are responsible for ensuring the safety and well-being of others (Reamer, 1991). This dilemma is often resolved in favour of the law. While the law on the Rights and Freedoms of

3  Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Spanish Case

61

Foreigners and their Social Integration (Ley Orgánica 4/2000, sobre derechos y libertades de los extranjeros en España y su integración social, 2000) is restrictive and thus limits opportunities for intervention in the case of migrants with irregular status, there is a loophole due to article 14.3; this article declares that any foreigner, whatever their status, has the right to basic social services and benefits. In the field of social work, allowing sufficient time to address the complexities of dealing with immigrants and to understand intercultural relations is one of the facilitating variables. Local authority care tends to focus on short-term remedies rather than on prevention and long-term solutions; this is primarily due to increasing demands and limited budgets. In contrast, third sector organisations focus more specifically on support for migration-related issues due to their closer proximity and connection to service users. This idea has been put forward by multiple authors (Crespo, 2011; Moreno, Arriba, & Moreno, 2006; Vernis, 2004) and was also supported by the migrants interviewed and in the discussion groups. This is perhaps one of the most conclusive findings in this research project. However, the term proximity is only meaningful in relation to more distant entities, such as social services or other public sector entities, which this research found to be remarkably ambiguous. This can be viewed as an opposition between acceptance and rejection in terms of providing support. Social workers’ interventions with migrants are facilitated by more extensive professional experience. Our research (UB2) found that while professional social work skills are essential, there is also a need for additional specialist training. In the interviews with migrants, they expressed a range of attitudes towards the assistance they had received from public services: some viewed this as overcoming stigmas while others described outright rejection. Responses to support provided by specialist organisations did not reveal this same dichotomy, on the contrary, migrants tended to express gratitude and give positive assessments. This implies that knowledge and experience of migration-related issues facilitates the provision of support. However, the most significant data emerged from the two discussion groups. In the experts’ group (GD1), there was clarity about the strategies and measures required, such as individual, group and community strategies, networks and bridge building. In contrast, the non-expert group (GD2) was less clear and specific on these issues. Due to reduced funding for the social system, social work measures which support inclusion have been cut back significantly leading to instability and dependence. The professionals in the two discussion groups described these difficulties and their inability to change this situation. This is due to a lack of available training on labour market insertion, accessing benefits and application procedures for residence and work permits. These difficulties are related to supporting inclusion within the framework of ‘precariousness’ (Castel, 2010). In an individualised society, a social safety net is essential to ensure that all people have a right to minimum social support, which facilitates independence (Castel, 2004). Migration, however, frequently leads to conditions of extreme insecurity and dependence.

62

C. Palacín Bartrolí et al.

3.3.2  Gay Men Aged over 50: From Contempt to Respect In Spain, the field of social work with older gay men did not begin to focus on sexual diversity until the 1980s and 1990s; this was based on approaches to feminism and on support for people affected by HIV and AIDS. The incorporation of social work professionals into LGBT organisations has enabled them to provide guidance, support and individualised care, as well as to alleviate the suffering caused by experiences of homophobia in society and rejection in non-specialised social services (Maroto Sáez, 2006). There have, however, been collective interventions in social and healthcare training on cultural competencies relating to sexual diversity (Fredriksen-Goldsen, Hoy-Ellis, Goldsen, Emlet, & Hooyman, 2014; Parra & Boixadós, 2016). As LGBT people now experience greater social acceptance and respect than in the past, social interventions to support older gay men should be considered in relation to policies focusing on active ageing (Pérez Salanova, 2016).

3.3.3  Migrant Roma Women: Mistrust of Social Services Despite prevalent perceptions that Roma women are extremely frequent users of social services, the testimonies of the female research participants (UAB) showed this stereotype to be false. This corroborates other research findings (ASPROSOCU, 2008; Ministry of Science and Innovation, 2009–2011), which revealed that many male and female Roma migrants prefer to resort to other mechanisms (such as family support or third sector organisations) to address their needs rather than turning to social services primary care (Servicios Sociales de Atención Primaria [SSAP]). This aversion to seeking help from social services and a mistrust of the public administration stem from biased views about social services. Such attitudes have, however, arisen due to the dominant logic of social services and as a result of the regulations, and the administrative and political criteria to which social workers have to conform. The Roma community generally perceives SSAP as a department which attempts to limit their access to the support they need. There is also an assumption that SSAP creates bureaucratic hurdles which do not take Roma perspectives into account—such as the process of registering residency—and which exert pressure on communities to change their family structures. Our research showed that Roma migrant women need to rely on support from their own trusted networks in order to access social services. Support is most commonly accessed through third sector organisations or via schools and community health centres (CAPs). These organisations support Roma migrant women by providing information and assistance for dealing with legal and administrative procedures. In this process, women establish trust relationships with professionals, which in turn enable them to connect with social services. Trust relationships allow women to engage in active dialogue with their families and help

3  Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Spanish Case

63

them to overcome their mistrust of SSAP. However, the most effective strategy for accessing SSAP is through supportive relationships between Roma migrant women. Our research showed that companionship, giving advice and passing on valuable information about social rights were all prevalent among Roma migrant women; those who have experience of and connections to SSAP support those who do not. This type of support strategy transcends group distinctions based on immigration status and countries of origin; furthermore, it leads many women who were initially reluctant to use social services to actually reach out to SSAP. The UAB research also showed that Roma women—whether Spanish citizens or migrants—use collective action to secure social rights for themselves and their families. Most of the women interviewed for this study either participate in or have been involved in women’s meetings organised by non-profit entities or local administrations within the framework of specific programmes for the Roma community, or they belong to an informal women’s solidarity network. It is also significant that Roma women with higher levels of education and previous participative experience choose to associate with other Roma and non-Roma migrant women in order to support their advancement and that of their communities. They also provide a valuable insight into the social injustice and discrimination experienced by Roma people within society. In summary, women’s formal and informal solidarity networks are effectively overcoming the discriminatory barriers which have emerged due to misinformation, a fear of social services, legal issues and women’s roles within the Roma community. Social workers can use such networks to develop interventions in accordance with the needs and inclinations of Roma migrant women, regardless of the institutional context (e.g. SSAP, specialised services or social initiative services). According to Munté (2012), a number of key points should be considered in relation to interventions. Firstly, official documents are required; a lack of papers can present a barrier to seeking assistance from SSAP and to obtaining specific resources used as intervention tools by primary healthcare professionals. This is also a factor in relation to other social rights guaranteed by the Spanish welfare state. The residency registration certificate and the health card are two key documents which facilitate access to assistance for Roma families who are living in precarious situations. In general, debureaucratising social care schemes and ensuring dialogic communication within SSAP and other care services are essential factors (Flecha, 2009) of social services interventions. Furthermore, they form the basis of relationships of mutual trust between Roma families and social services. It is evident from the UAB research that Roma migrant women more frequently seek help from third sector organisations than from SSAP. The Roma women interviewed reported that associations, foundations and other NGOs took a more lenient approach; this was confirmed by a number of professionals in the group discussions. Third sector organisations tend to be more flexible as they have a better understanding of the needs of Roma women and their families. Creating spaces for dialogue is a key to encouraging Roma women to establish and join social networks. These spaces may be formal or informal, and they may involve setting up associations, SSAP-supported group interventions or other social

64

C. Palacín Bartrolí et al.

initiatives. However, it is vital that such projects are coordinated in collaboration with Roma women in their neighbourhoods and that they are not restricted by spatial boundaries. Furthermore, given the active religious identities of many Roma migrant women, it would be useful to create interreligious spaces and projects to connect different groups and enable them to support each other. To summarise, it is vital to involve Roma women when designing and developing social interventions to support them. The projects coordinated in collaboration with schools, community health centres (CAPs) and social initiatives are a positive start and are improving access to and engagement with an increasing number of Roma women and their families.

3.3.4  H  omelessness: Relationships, Proximity and Recognising Rights In relation to homelessness, the research results (UB1) indicate that that focusing on proximity and social support is fundamental to supporting homeless people. Relationships with individuals work most effectively when they focus on a person’s life process in their usual surroundings. This kind of support proactively creates a connection between a social worker and a homeless person—a process which leads to the provision of social support. Funes and Raya (2001) suggest that such support is about accompanying an individual and sharing a joint project; this includes recognising that person’s rights and ensuring that they receive the financial and social support needed to advance their process of social affiliation (Raya & Caparrós, 2014). Types of services range from social, educational and therapeutic support to access to social services funds and resources; these are all important tools in the affiliation process (Funes & Alonso, 2009). The type of support provided depends on the service and support model used. Our research (UB1) examined multiple services in both public and private organisations in Barcelona and outlined the types of support provided by social workers. These services are characterised by intensive cross-practice support provided throughout the affiliation process; a focus on the individual is viewed as the fundamental basis for social inclusion. From a holistic perspective, the social worker performs multiple tasks, welcoming and assessing individuals, and identifying appropriate social support in each case. This involves techniques based on relationship and mediation processes according to the extent of an individual’s social exclusion. Establishing a relationship between the client and the social worker is central to providing social support. This relationship facilitates the development of a shared roadmap and a co-­diagnosis, which can enable the complex processes which led to social exclusion to be reversed. This support must be connected to an individual’s life story (with a focus on that individual’s age, gender, origin, traumatic experiences and how they cope with life on the streets), material conditions (type of accommodation, extent of labour market

3  Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Spanish Case

65

integration, training and benefits) and social and institutional support (from family, friends and social professionals). Furthermore, support is provided through an intervention group (socio-­ educational) and work with social professionals (multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary). Group activities for homeless people are oriented towards socialisation, rehabilitation, changing habits, job placement and equal coexistence. In some cases, the group techniques applied by social workers are determined by the configuration of services, for example, in day centres or convalescence centres. Rossell (1998) argues that socio-educational groups are frequently used as care services for people with drug addictions, mental health issues or employment difficulties. They serve to reinforce cohesion and facilitate recovery processes. In addition, techniques related to community involvement are used; these include networking and activities focused on increasing community awareness. Since 2014, some municipalities and third sector organisations in Barcelona have been implementing the Housing First model, which enables interdisciplinary teams to provide support to individuals according to their specific needs. This model focuses on proximity, maximum flexibility and a belief in the possibility of change. Several authors (Aguilar & Llobet, 2011; Funes, 2001; Raya & Caparrós, 2014) have argued that homeless people do better when their basic rights are recognised, and their views and suggestions considered; this includes the right to decide where to live. The Housing First model enables a professional or partner to become a flexible, communicative coach, while the individuals they support and accompany become citizens with full rights. This process involves the deployment of ethical values, such as self-determination, co-responsibility and social justice; it also supports inclusive citizenship.

3.3.5  Drawing Common Conclusions Finally, we will conclude this chapter with some reflections on the findings of the four research projects discussed. Relational processes are significant to most of the research. Roma migrant women (UAB) show the importance of building trust and confidence in relationships with care services. Interventions for homeless people pivot on the idea of proximity and creating closeness, which constitutes a fundamental tool in social linking and accompanying processes. Similarly, the research on migrants (UB2) showed that care connections are rooted in identification processes and in social professionals’ knowledge of the groups that they work with. However, it also became evident that intercultural mediation often creates more problems than it solves. In each of the four research projects, third sector organisations were found to provide a level of care, reliability and benchmarking which seemed to be lacking in public social services. In the case of LGBT people, the third sector represents a significant field of transformative activism. For Roma migrant women, third sector organisations function as facilitators and intermediate spaces between the Roma

66

C. Palacín Bartrolí et al.

community and social services. The research on homelessness showed that most of the proximity-based initiatives originated from third sector entities. In relation to migrants, NGOs enable them to find security and immediate support, regardless of their immigration status. It is interesting to consider why the third sector is so significant in these areas of social work. Aspects such as proximity and reliability were discussed earlier in the chapter, however, perhaps the most important factor is the failure of public services to deal with certain issues. In the case of Roma migrant women, social services primary care have projected an image of dependence, however, our research (UAB) showed that this was not the case. Roma women frequently seek help through other channels in order to meet their needs and Roma families perceive social services as restrictive. The research on migrants (UB2) also highlighted this issue showing that undocumented migrants perceive the lack of support available from social services as rejection. In addition, the research projects discussed showed that collective interventions form the basis of support for the LGBT community (due to transformative action through activism), for Roma migrant women (through participation) and for homeless people (through networks and awareness raising). Our aim was to show the instability experienced by four groups whose trajectories are influenced by multiple factors and by complex social structures. Our research demonstrated that while some social protection mechanisms promote social inclusion processes, others are insufficient and can even push individuals further towards disaffiliation. This chapter highlighted the challenges for social work in supporting inclusion when faced with the multi-layered complexities of social systems, individual trajectories and group and community structures. Furthermore, it became clear from the research that these realities are constantly changing and evolving; there is hence a need to expand and develop research in this field.

References Advisory Council for Sustainable Development, Government of Catalonia (CADS). (2018). The 2030 agenda: Transform Catalonia, improve the world: the challenges for meeting Sustainable Development Goals in Catalonia. Retrieved April 06, 2020, from http://cads.gencat.cat/web/. content/Documents/Informes/2016/Agenda_2030_CAT/CADS-Report_3_2016_The-2030Agenda_Transform-Catalonia_Improve-the-World.pdf Aguilar, M., & Llobet, M. (2011). Integralidad, acompañamiento, proximidad, incorporación: el papel de los servicios sociales. In F. L. Vives (Ed.), Cuaderno europeo 8: Debates fundamentals en el marco de la Inclusión Social en España (pp. 117–128). Madrid: Fundación Luis Vives. Alemán, C., & Soriano, R.  M. (2014). Servicios Sociales e Inmigración en tiempos de crisis económica. Barcelona Centre for International Affairs. Retrieved April 06, 2020, from http://www.cidob.org/articulos/anuario_de_la_inmigracion_en_espana/2012/ servicios_sociales_e_inmigracion_en_tiempos_de_crisis Arneson, J.  R. (1989). Equality and equal opportunity for welfare. Philosophical Studies, 56, 77–93.

3  Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Spanish Case

67

ASPROSOCU. (2008). Lungo Drom. La población rrom del Este Europeo en el Arco Mediterráneo. In El largo camino hacia la inclusión social. Murcia: Integraf Magenta, SL. Barcelona City Council. (2014). Xarxa d’atenció a Persones Sense Llar. Retrieved April 06, 2020, from http://www.bcn.cat/barcelonainclusiva/ca/xarxa2.html Barcelona City Council. (2017). 2016–2020 Barcelona plan for fighting homelessness. Accessed April 06, 2020, from https://ajuntament.barcelona.cat/dretssocials/sites/default/files/arxiusdocuments/barcelona_plan_fighting_homelessness_2016-2020.pdf Benito, J., & Villagrasa, C. (2009). Los otros represaliados y discriminados del franquismo, desde la memoria histórica. Barcelona: Edicions Bellaterra. Berry, J. (2001). A psychology of immigration. Journal of Social Issues, 57(3), 615–631. Cabrera, P. J. (1998). Huéspedes del aire. Sociología de las personas sin hogar en Madrid. Madrid: Universidad Pontificia Comillas. Cabrera, P.  J., & Rubio, M.  J. (2008). Las personas sin hogar, hoy. Revista del Ministerio de Trabajo e Inmigración, 75, 51–74. Castel, R. (1992). La Inserción y los nuevos retos de las intervenciones sociales. In F. Álvarez-Uría (Ed.), Marginación e Inserción (pp. 25–36). Madrid: Endymon. Castel, R. (1995). De la exclusión como estado a la vulnerabilidad como proceso. Archipiélago, 21, 27–36. Castel, R. (1997). Las metamorfosis de la cuestión social. Una crónica del salariado. Buenos Aires: Paidós. Castel, R. (2004). La inseguridad social. ¿Qué es estar protegido? Buenos Aires: Manantial. Castel, R. (2010). El ascenso de las incertidumbres. Trabajo, protecciones, estatuto del individuo. Buenos Aires: Fondo de Cultura Económica. Castiñeira, A., & Vidal, P. (2002). Llibre blanc del tercer sector civicosocial: document de síntesis. Retrieved April 06, 2020, from http://www.tercersector.cat/sites/www.tercersector.cat/files/ llibre_blanc_civico_social.pdf Castoriadis, C. (2004). Sujeto y verdad en el mundo histórico-social. (Seminarios 1986-1987). La Creación humana I. Buenos Aires: Fondo de Cultura Económica. Colectivo Ioé, C. (2012). Impactos de la crisis sobre la población inmigrante. Estudio promovido por la Organización Internacional para las Migraciones. Retrieved April 06, 2020, from https://www.colectivoioe.org/uploads/0bae582aa3b0842a9eaf50cde16f4f97d9527bcb.pdf Contreras, A., Munté, A., Prieto, O., & Sordé, T. (2012). Immigrant and native Romani women in Spain: Building alliances and developing shared strategies. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 38(8), 1233–1249. Crespo, T. (2011). El tercer sector social, un sector emergent. Revista de Ciencias Sociales, 193, 45–59. Cross, T. L., Bazron, B. J., Dennis, K. W., & Isaacs, M. R. (1989). Towards a culturally competent system of care: A monograph on effective services for minority children who are severely emotionally disturbed. Washington, DC: Georgetown University. D’Emilio, J. (1998). Sexual politics, sexual communities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Entitats Catalanes d’Acció Social. (n.d.). Who we are. Retrieved April 06, 2020, from https:// acciosocial.org/en/ Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press. European Anti-Poverty Network Spain (EAPN-ES). (2010). Propuestas del Tercer Sector de Acción Social para una Estrategia de Inclusión Social 2020 en España. Retrieved April 06, 2020, from https://www.eapn.es/ARCHIVO/documentos/documentos/Propuestas2020.PDF European Commission. (2014). Confronting homelessness in the European Union. Brussels: FEANTSA. European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. (2018). A persisting concern: Antigypsism as a barrier to Roma inclusion. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Retrieved April 06, 2020, from http://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2018/roma-inclusion Fernández Prat, M. (2009). La inclusión social en el ámbito local: los mecanismos y sistemas de trabajo. In J. M. Fresno (Ed.), Políticas de inclusión activa en el plano loca (pp. 47–75).

68

C. Palacín Bartrolí et al.

Madrid: Fundación Luis Vives. Retrieved April 06, 2020, from http://www.fresnoconsulting.es/ upload/74/24/10_Cuaderno_Europeo_6.pdf Flecha, R. (2009). Cambio, inclusión y calidad en las comunidades de aprendizaje. Cultura y Educación, 21(2), 157–169. Fraser, N. (1997). ¿De la redistribución al reconocimiento? Dilemas entorno a la justicia en una época postsocialista. Justicia Interrupta. Reflexiones críticas des de la posición postsocialista. Santa Fe de Bogotá: Siglo del Hombre Editores. Fredriksen-Goldsen, K., Hoy-Ellis, C. P., Goldsen, J., Emlet, C. A., & Hooyman, N. R. (2014). Creating a vision for the future: Key competencies and strategies for culturally competent practice with lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) older adults in the health and human services. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 57(24), 80–107. Freud, S. (1984). Psicología de las masas. In Más allá del principio del placer. El porvenir de una ilusión. Madrid: Alianza Editorial. Fundació, A. (2016). Housing First a Arrels Fundació: un viratge en procés. In O. S. de Barcelona (Ed.), Barcelona Societat. Revista de coneixement i anàlisi social (pp.  148–155). Retrieved April 06, 2020, from https://ajuntament.barcelona.cat/dretssocials/sites/default/files/revista/ revista-20-completa.pdf Fundación Secretariado Gitano. (2012). Población gitana, empleo e inclusión social. Un estudio comparado: población gitana española y del este de Europa. Retrieved April 06, 2020, from https://www.gitanos.org/upload/60/99/empleo_e_inclusion_social.pdf Funes, J. (2001). La nova Llei penal i educativa: una lectura en clau educativa i que intenta ser illusionada. Educació Social, 18, 10–24. Funes, J., & Alonso, A. (2009). Transiciones, itinerarios y procesos. Educación Social: Revista de Intervención Socioeducativa, 42, 15–27. Funes, J., & Raya, E. (2001). El acompañamiento y los procesos de incorporación social. Guía para su práctica. Bilbao: Federación Sartu. García, J. T., & Verdú, A. D. (2008). Imaginarios sociales sobre migración: evolución de la autoimagen del inmigrante. Revista de Sociología, 89, 81–101. Government of Catalonia. (2014). Pla d’acció per la lluita contra la pobreza i per la inclusión social a Catalunya 2015–2016. Retrieved April 06, 2020, from https://treballiaferssocials.gencat.cat/web/.content/03ambits_tematics/06pobresa_i_inclusio_social/lluita_contra_pobresa/ pla_pobresa.pdf Grinberg, L. (1985). Teoría de la Identificación. Madrid: Tecnipublicaciones SA. Grinberg, L., & Grinberg, R. (1996). Migración y Exilio. Estudio psicoanalítico. Madrid: Biblioteca Nueva. Guasch, O. (1991). La sociedad rosa. Barcelona: Anagrama. Guasp, A. (2011). Lesbian, gay bisexual people in later life. London: Stonewall. Hancock, I. (2002). We are the Romani people. Hertfordshire: University of Hertfordshire Press. Higgins, A., Sharek, D., McCann, E., Glacken, M., Breen, M., McCarron, M., et al. (2011). Visible lives. In Identifying the experiences and needs of older lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in Ireland. Dublin: Gay and Lesbian Equality Network. Homeless in Europe. (2008). Housing and Homelessness: Models and practices from across Europe. Retrieved April 06, 2020, from https://www.feantsa.org/download/homeless_in_ europe_winter20081788329516952435982.pdf Klein, M. (1988). Sobre la identificación. Envidia y Gratitud y otros trabajos. Obras completas 3. Buenos Aires: Paidós. Laparra, M., & Pérez, B. (2009). Abordar la realidad de la exclusión social en España a nivel local. In J.  M. Fresno (Ed.), Políticas de inclusión activa en el plano local (pp.  77–116). Madrid: Fundación Luis Vives. Retrieved April 06, 2020, from http://www.fresnoconsulting. es/upload/74/24/10_Cuaderno_Europeo_6.pdf Ley Orgánica sobre derechos y libertades de los extranjeros en España y su integración social. (2000). BOE, núm. 10. Retrieved April 15, 2020, from https://www.boe.es/buscar/pdf/2000/ BOE-A-2000-544-consolidado.pdf

3  Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Spanish Case

69

Linares, E. (2001). Personas sin hogar: de la exclusión a la Inserción. Trabajo Social Hoy, 2, 53–62. Llobet, M., Baillergeau, E., & Thirot, M. (2012). Los ‘peer workers’ y la participación de las personas y colectivos en situación de exclusión social. Cuadernos de Trabajo Social, 25(2), 383–392. Maestro, G. (2010). Els drets socials dels emigrants. Revista Catalana de Dret Públic, 40, 53–72. Maroto Sáez, A. L. (2006). Homosexualidad y trabajo social: Herramientas para la reflexión e intervención profesional. Madrid: Consejo General Diplomados en Trabajo Social y Asistentes Sociales. Martínez, O., & Centro de Investigaciones de la Economía Mundial. (1997). Investigación sobre el desarrollo humano en Cuba 1996. Havana: United Nations Development Programme. Mata, N. (2009). Criteris per una formació de base en treball social intercultural. Revista de Treball Social, 187(2), 49–58. Matulič, M. V. (2015). Procesos de inclusión social de las personas sin hogar en la ciudad de Barcelona: Relatos de vida y acompañamiento social (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved April 06, 2020, from https://www.tdx.cat/bitstream/handle/10803/393958/MVMD_TESIS.pdf;jsessi onid=49AA4B5157575F7D905AF91BD5DEFBE8?sequence=1 Matulič, M. V., Cabré, C., & García, A. (2016). L’atenció a les persones sense llar a la ciutat de Barcelona: una mirada històrica i de futur. Barcelona Societat: Revista d’informació i Estudis Socials, 20, 59–77. Mesquida, J. M. (2017). Homes gais majors de 50 anys. Situació social, trajectòries de vida, acció collectiva i Treball Social (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved April 06, 2020, from http://hdl. handle.net/2445/115442 Messinger, L. (2006). Toward affirmative practice. In D. F. Morrow & I. Messinger (Eds.), Sexual orientation and gender expression in social work practice: Working with gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people (pp. 460–470). New York: Columbia University Press. Ministry of Health, Social Services and Equality. (2014). Plan Nacional de acción para la inclusión social del Reino de España. Retrieved April 06, 2020, from https://www.mscbs.gob.es/ssi/ familiasInfancia/inclusionSocial/docs/PlanNacionalAccionInclusionSocial_2013_2016.pdf Ministry of Science and Innovation. (2009–2011). DROM-IN. Roma immigration in Spain: The challenges of social inclusion and coexistence. National RTD Plan, Spanish Government. Unpublished research report. Monferrer, J. (2010). Identidad y cambio social: transformaciones promovidas por el movimiento gay/lesbiano en España. Barcelona: Egales Editorial. Moreno, F. J., Arriba, A., & Moreno, L. (2006). Inmigración, diversidad y protección social en España. Revista Española del Tercer Sector, 4, 53–97. Moreno, F. J., & Bruquetas, M. (2011). Inmigración y Estado de bienestar en España. Barcelona: Obra Social Fundación “la Caixa”. Moreno, G., & Aierdi, X. (2008). Inmigración y servicios sociales: ¿última red o primer trampolín? Revista de Servicios Sociales, 44, 7–18. Morin, E. (1999). Seven complex lessons in education for the future. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. Muñoz, M., & Vázquez, C. (1998). Las personas sin hogar: aspectos psicosociales de la situación española. Intervención Psicosocial, 7(1), 7–26. Munté, A. (2012). Anàlisi del paper de les dones gitanes immigrants en l’accés als drets socials (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved April 06, 2020, from https://www.tesisenred.net/ handle/10803/96426#page=1 Munuera, P., & Munuera, M.  A. (2007). Mediación intercultural en el ámbito-socio-sanitario. Trabajo Social Hoy, 2, 119–141. National Statistics Institute. (2014). Encuesta de condiciones de vida (ECV-2014). Retrieved April 06, 2020, from www.ine.es/prensa/np908.pdf Navarro, V. (2003). L’Estat de benestar a Catalunya. Barcelona: Diputació de Barcelona.

70

C. Palacín Bartrolí et al.

Oxford University Press. (2019). Third sector. Lexico.com. Retrieved April 06, 2020, from https:// www.lexico.com/definition/third_sector Pajares, M. (2010). Inmigración y mercado de trabajo. Informe 2010. Ministerio de Trabajo e Inmigración. Retrieved April 06, 2020, from http://extranjeros.mitramiss.gob.es/es/observatorioPermanenteInmigracion/Publicaciones/fichas/archivos/Inmigracion__Mercado_de_ Trabajo_OPI25.pdf Palacín, C. (2015). Aspectes psicosocials de la migració: processos psicològics i espais d’atenció. Imaginari, dol i estrès en el món migratori.  - L’acció del treball social vers el col·lectiu d’immigrants: de l’exclusió a la inserció? (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved April 06, 2020, from http://www.tesisenred.net/handle/10803/388040?show=full Palacín, C. (2017). La irregularitat administrativa dels immigrants. Una empenta a la desafiliació. Revista de Treball Social, 207, 96–111. Parra, B., & Boixadós, A. (2016). Formación y sensibilización de profesionales del ámbito sociosanitario en el respeto a la diversidad sexual. In D. Carbonero, E. Raya, N. Caparros & C. Gimeno (Eds.), Respuestas transdisciplinares en una Sociedad global. Aportaciones desde el Trabajo Social. Logroño: Universidad de La Rioja. Retrieved April 06, 2020, from https:// publicaciones.unirioja.es/catalogo/online/CIFETS_2016/Monografia/pdf/TC320.pdf Peeters, K. (2005). Entre tenebres. Gitanos immigrants: Els Rom de l’est d’Europa a Barcelona y el seu accés a l’educació. Barcelona: Fundació Bofill-Finestra Oberta. Pérez Salanova, M. (2016). Cinco elementos clave del envejecimiento activo. In S.  Ezquerra, M. Pérez Salanova, M. Pla, & J. Subirats (Eds.), Edades en transición. Envejecer en el siglo XXI (pp. 159–164). Barcelona: Editorial Ariel. Raya, E., & Caparrós, N. (2014). Acompañamiento como metodología de Trabajo Social en tiempos de cólera. Cuadernos de Trabajo Social, 27(1), 81–91. Real Decreto Legislativo 1/2013, por el que se aprueba el Texto Refundido de la Ley General de derechos de las personas con discapacidad y de su inclusión social. (2013). BOE, 289. Retrieved April 15, 2020, from https://www.boe.es/eli/es/rdlg/2013/11/29/1/con Reamer, F. G. (1991). Aids & ethics. New York: Columbia University Press. Renes, V., Fuentes, P., Ruíz, E., & Jaraíz, G. (2007). Realidad, pensamiento e intervención social. Documentación Social. Revista de Estudios Sociales y de Sociología Aplicada, 14, 11–35. Retorlillo, A. (2009). Evolución de los modelos psicológicos de aculturación en Norteamérica y en Europa: de la unidimensionalidad a la bidimensionalidad en el tratamiento de la inmigración. Revista de Historia de la Psicología, 30(1), 73–86. Revenga, A., Ringold, D., & Tracy, W. M. (2002). Poverty and ethnicity: A cross-country study of Roma poverty in Central Europe. Washington, DC: World Bank. Richmond, M. (1995). El Caso social individual: el diagnóstico social (textos seleccionados). Madrid: Talasa Ediciones. Rizo, A. (2005). Apuntes sobre la comunidad gitana española: breves trazos de su historia en conexión con el contexto europeo. Revista Electrónica de Historia, 6(1), 179–229. Roca, G. (2006). Relatos, metáforas y dilemas. Para transformar las exclusiones. In F. Vidal (Ed.), Exclusión social y Estado de Bienestar en España (pp. 9–28). Madrid: Icaria Editorial SA. Rossell, T. (1998). Trabajo Social de grupo: grupos socio terapéuticos y socioeducativos. Cuadernos de Trabajo Social, 11, 103–122. SAGE. (2019). Advocacy for LGBT elders. Retrieved April 06, 2020, from https://www.sageusa. org/what-we-do/advocacy-for-lgbt-elders/ Sarasa, S., & Sales, A. (2009). Itineraris i factors d’exclusió social. Barcelona: Síndica de Greuges de Barcelona. Selten, J.  P., Cantor-Graae, E., & Kahn, R.  S. (2007). Migration and schizophrenia. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 20(2), 111–115. Sen, A. (2000). Desarrollo y libertad. Barcelona: Planeta, SA. Statistical Institute of Catalonia. (2015). Enquesta de condicions de vida, Població en risc de pobresa o exclusió social (taxa AROPE). Interseccions entre subpoblacions, base 2013. Retrieved April 06, 2020, from http://www.idescat.cat/pub/?id=ecv&n=7716&lang=en

3  Inclusive Society and Social Work: The Spanish Case

71

Suárez-Orozco, C., & Suárez-Orozco, M.  M. (2003). La Infancia de la inmigración. Madrid: Ediciones Morata. Subirats, J. (2004). Pobresa i exclusió social. Una anàlisi de la realitat espanyola i europea. Fundació “la Caixa”. Retrieved April 06, 2020, from http://extra.girones.cat/cbs/Observatori/ docs/POBRESA/AnalisiRealitatEspEu2004.pdf Subirats, J. (2010). Les politiques socials a Catalunya: Algunes reflexions en plena transformación social. Revista de Treball Social, 191, 9–19. Subirats, J. (2016). Cambio de época y personas mayores. Una concepción de ciudadanía abierta e inclusiva. In S. Ezquerra, M. Pérez Salanova, M. Pla, & J. Subirats (Eds.), Edades en transición. Envejecer en el siglo XXI (pp. 21–43). Editorial Ariel: Barcelona. Tarrow, S. (1994). El poder en movimiento. In Los movimientos sociales, la acción colectiva y la política. Madrid: Alianza Editorial, SA. Taula del Tercer Sector social de Catalunya. (n.d.). Presentació. Retrieved April 06, 2020, from http://www.tercersector.cat/qui-som/presentacio Tezanos, J. F. (2004). Tendencias en desigualdad y exclusión social. Tercer Foro sobre tendencias sociales. Madrid: Editorial Sistema. Ugarte, J. (2011). Homoerotismo, identidad y resistencia. Madrid: Egales. United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. (2008). Genocide of European Roma (Gypsies), 1939–1945. Retrieved April 06, 2020, from https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/ genocide-of-european-roma-gypsies-1939-1945 Vélez-Pelligrini, L. (2008). Minorias sexuales y sociologia de la diferencia. Barcelona: Editorial Montesinos. Vernis, A. (2004). La colaboración entre administraciones públicas y organizaciones no lucrativas: hacia la sociedad relacional. In IX Congreso Internacional del CLAD sobre la Reforma del Estado y de la Administración Pública. Retrieved April 06, 2020, from http://biblioteca.municipios.unq.edu.ar/modules/mislibros/archivos/0049632.pdf Vidal, F. (2011). Políticas de reconciliación social. Vínculo y sentido contra la exclusión. In C. Española (Ed.), Corintios XIII. Revista de teología y pastoral de la caridad (pp. 125–201). Madrid: Caritas Española. Weber, M. (2014). Economía y sociedad. Madrid: Fondo de Cultura Económica.

Chapter 4

Inclusive Society Within the Framework of a Transitioning Society: Examples from the Republic of Croatia Nino Žganec and Ana Opačić

4.1  I nterpretations, Challenges and Contexts: Introducing the Concept of Inclusive Society The concept of inclusive society was introduced in Croatia via two different terms: inclusion (inkluzija) and social inclusion (uključenost), as opposed to social exclusion (isključenost). However, in general use, these two concepts have been applied quite differently with reference to different social realities. Usage of both these terms has been narrowed down and they are often applied to particular social problems or vulnerable groups. In Croatia, the idea of an inclusive society has not been embraced in a way that incorporates its full epistemological and ethical potential. Whilst the concept of inclusion (as opposed to inclusive society) has been adopted, in terms of the position of adults and children with disabilities in Croatian society, inclusion has remained almost completely in the private realm. Inclusion has become a synonym for a social model of disability, and it symbolises two important social agendas: (1) deinstitutionalisation and (2) the inclusion of children with special needs in the mainstream education system. However, the terms social exclusion and social inclusion were also referred to in a parallel process. These terms were intended to be used in a wider sense and were introduced in the Joint Memorandum on Social Inclusion of the Republic of Croatia (Ministry of Health and Social Welfare, 2007) to refer to any vulnerable group. The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) carried out significant research on this issue and published the report Unplugged: Faces of Social Exclusion in Croatia in 2006. The aim of this research was to map different levels of social exclusion amongst all of the following vulnerable groups: national minorities, Croatian N. Žganec · A. Opačić (*) Department of Social Work, Faculty of Law, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 S. Bundschuh et al. (eds.), Ambivalences of Inclusion in Society and Social Work, European Social Work Education and Practice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55446-0_4

73

74

N. Žganec and A. Opačić

returnees and internally displaced persons, people with intellectual disabilities, people with physical disabilities, single parents, unemployed people, vulnerable young people, prisoners, female victims of domestic violence, elderly people, homeless people, people living with HIV, sexual minorities, people with addictions and children affected by poverty. However, the term was then narrowed down further, and social exclusion was used in relation to or even as a replacement for the term poverty. Referring to social exclusion reflected the complexity of poverty, but the term was also used to deflect attention from the central issues relating to poverty, or even to undermine the seriousness of the problem. In Croatia, insufficient attention has been paid to the concept of inclusive society. Furthermore, there is a lack of clarity about the meaning of the terms inclusion and social inclusion. We will focus on this concept inclusion as this term is more widely used.

4.1.1  The Concept of Inclusion in Croatian Social Work The concept of inclusion is now well integrated into social work practice with adults and young people with disabilities. It is used to reflect on two key social aims: implementing deinstitutionalisation and developing an inclusive education system. In this sense, inclusion has several dimensions: (a) Inclusion within public systems (mostly education): This relates to equal opportunities and avoiding segregation. Two key dimensions should be considered here: how the education system can be transformed to embrace children with special needs and the level of acceptance within peer groups; (b) Inclusion within local communities (i.e. neighbourhoods, community activities and community services); (c) Inclusion within informal social support networks; (d) Inclusion within support groups (this can also refer to inclusion within particular minority groups or formal support organisations [e.g. NGOs]); (e) Inclusion as a way of living (mainly residential settings for people with intellectual disabilities as an alternative to living in an institution). This range of dimensions illustrates that the concept of an inclusive society is interpreted in multiple ways but is most often used to refer to making space within society for people with disabilities. This aspect of transforming society includes legislative and institutional changes, as well as changes in public perception. Furthermore, integrating adults and children with disabilities into the everyday fabric of local communities, kindergartens and schools can present a significant challenge.

4  Inclusive Society Within the Framework of a Transitioning Society: Examples…

75

4.1.2  D  eveloping Inclusion in the Context of a National Framework It is important to understand the Croatian social welfare system in the context of its history. Croatia is a post-socialist European country that has transitioned to a new economic and political regime. During the socialist era, the extensive social care system consisted mainly of care homes and centres for social work; there was minimal involvement from civil society organisations. The official state view was that practically all social problems were taken care of and that the resolution of social problems must be assigned to educated professionals (Puljiz, 2006). The state dominated many aspects of life, such as providing access to education, health and social care and ensuring that there was almost full employment, as well as organising leisure activities for working people. Amongst the population, the state was perceived as being more powerful and significant than either family or local communities in terms of organising everyday needs. Separate institutional care for people with disabilities was part of this image. When the issue of deinstitutionalisation was eventually raised in the late 1990s and particularly the 2000s, questions arose regarding the appropriacy of institutional care. Not only staff but also family members and even users themselves felt that the most reliable safety net was (and to some extent still is) within an institutional context. Social work education was first developed after World War II, and social work was a mechanism of the welfare state. In the early 1970s, this connection was challenged and the focus of social work education shifted towards a more scientific basis with the aim of gaining an insight into how society functions (Parton, 2000). There was a need to separate social work from the state administration, a trend that still applies today; this allows more space for professional creativity, self-reflection and autonomy (Dominelli, 1996). From the 1970s onwards, social work education underwent a process of transformation and the aim shifted from supporting existing social work practice to changing and improving practice. As a result, there are some discrepancies between social work education and practice, and this has led to inconsistent approaches to inclusion and deinstitutionalisation. However, further consideration is needed to overcome this divide between theory and practice. Today, Croatia faces the national challenge of creating an inclusive society. In the pre-accession period of joining the European Union (EU), the discourse on inclusion was powerful and legitimised. Since that time, public debate on the issue has become less controversial and the concept of inclusion has not been challenged. This may indicate that the meaning of inclusion is taken for granted; however, the intended meaning is sometimes unclear. The 2010 economic crisis led to budget cuts, and this had an impact on all processes in the social sector. In addition, political instability and the absence of clear political aims presented a significant challenge. The Social Care Act was changed three times in this period, and in 2015 and 2016, there were three parliamentary elections in Croatia. This not only led to budget and legislative instabilities, and

76

N. Žganec and A. Opačić

incomplete processes, but also resulted in delays in accessing European funding to support efforts to create a more inclusive society. Due to the incomplete transition process and the socialist legacy, the current social welfare system is highly bureaucratic; the non-governmental sector is generally unsustainable and lacking in coherence. The education system as a whole has faced major challenges and is generally struggling to reform. Furthermore, the school and preschool systems are overburdened and have difficulties keeping pace with social change. Mainstream schools were eventually able to take in a significant number of students with disabilities; however, many issues are yet to be resolved, and the conditions sometimes make it difficult for teachers to work effectively. Overall, this means that social work practitioners have had to deal with significant social change without a clear structural framework or associated formal procedures.

4.2  A Phenomenon of Inclusion This section predominantly focuses on adults and children with disabilities. As discussed earlier in this chapter, the reason for this is that the term inclusion is most frequently used to refer to these groups. Adults and children with disabilities face many problems in Croatia; they are more likely to be affected by poverty and economic deprivation, and they have limited access to education and the labour market. What is more, there are still significant issues regarding stigmatisation and self-­ stigmatisation. Social capital for people with disabilities, or families who have children with disabilities, is mostly limited to their immediate family, and they face many obstacles within the health and social care systems. For many years, these support systems have contributed to the exclusion, lack of power and isolation of these groups. In socialist Yugoslavia, the social response to people with disabilities was to place them in large institutional settings. Children were often separated from their immediate family and placed in institutions and/or enrolled in special or separate education, either in separate classes or in special schools. These schools, which were also social care homes, were located in several Croatian cities. Life in an institution was generally the only option, and some residents have lived almost their entire lives in such institutions. Frequently located on the outskirts of cities, these institutions housed between 50 and several hundred residents. At the beginning of the twenty-first century, there were major initiatives to start a process of deinstitutionalisation. However, there were some reservations about this move, for example from social care professionals, who were worried about the future of their jobs. Even families of people with disabilities were concerned about how these individuals would manage to live more independently. One major issue was that people in institutions had often lost all connections to the wider community and their families, so it was not possible for them to return to these environments.

4  Inclusive Society Within the Framework of a Transitioning Society: Examples…

77

Deinstitutionalised solutions were established in a way that deconstructed the institutional setting but did not lead to significant disruption in the labour market for social welfare professionals. There were two main elements to the deinstitutionalisation programme: placement in foster families and in smaller residential settings (houses and apartments for approximately four or five residents with the provision of continuous professional support). Most of these individuals did not return to their family homes, and this process did not lead to full deinstitutionalisation. The second general understanding of the term inclusion applies to the integration of children with disabilities into the mainstream education system. This is a process where special and separate education settings are replaced by education within mainstream classes, schools and kindergartens. This involves the provision of additional support from special needs assistants within the school and classroom. Inclusion was implemented in three phases: first in primary schools, then secondary schools and finally in kindergartens. This process was not without problems; the concerns raised by both teachers and parents demonstrate the potential pitfalls and the lack of preparation for this process. Croatian schools already had issues with large class sizes, and school staff were apprehensive about implementing the principles of inclusion. Nevertheless, inclusion in schools and the increased visibility of children with disabilities in society has led to some changes in public perception; inclusion in the educational system is now becoming an accepted norm. These two examples demonstrate how the principles of inclusion were operationalised in a concrete social agenda. However, in Croatia, the concept of inclusion does not extend much beyond these examples.

4.2.1  The Concept of Inclusive Education The concept of inclusion within the education system is supported by numerous social models and documentation in relation to disabilities and human rights, particularly the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD). Furthermore, people with disabilities are the most vulnerable group in the labour market, so ensuring that they have access to good educational opportunities improves their chances of finding employment and of social inclusion in general (Bošković, Ilić-Stošović, & Skočić-Mihić, 2017). Including children with disabilities in mainstream education programmes enables them to achieve greater development outcomes and reduces marginalisation and educational neglect (Bouillet & Loborec, 2012). In public debate on this issue, it is also the most significant justification for inclusion. However, the literature on this topic regards inclusion as a move away from merely providing assistance and support, and a step towards a new social culture. This view is based on several humanistic and ethical approaches, and inclusion is seen as a value that should be embraced by the education system (Rudelić, Pinoza-­ Kukurin, & Skočić Mihić, 2013). This concept of inclusion:

78

N. Žganec and A. Opačić

• • • •

supports openness and participation; promotes cultural sensitivity within a multicultural society; promotes social solidarity and mutual support; places the focus on children as individuals rather than on educational outcomes.

In evolved democratic societies, openness and participation are fundamental concepts and are based on the assumption that people can learn from each other and develop competencies through mutual interaction (Jurčević Lozančić & Kudek Mirošević, 2015). If we consider democracy and human rights on a more complex level, inclusion is based on an idea that social assets, such as education, are and should be owned by everyone in society, including those who differ from the dominant social norms. Education is of key importance here as it is considered one of the most powerful strategies for ensuring social cohesion (Vican, 2013). At an international level, education is defined as a tool for developing global peace, justice and a revalorisation of human dignity and development; it is the manifestation and means of achieving social justice as a source of tolerance, solidarity, respect and dignity (Vican, 2013). Declaring that children with disabilities have a right to education (Zrilić & Brzoja, 2013) means that they, like other children, are entitled to benefit from a state education system that will contribute to their holistic development as individuals. Inclusion is seen as a process that not only increases participation but also reduces exclusion; furthermore, it entitles children with special needs to recognition, acceptance and respect (Kudek Mirošević, 2016). This aspect was particularly inadequate in previous special education programmes. Inclusive education strongly promotes cultural sensitivity and encourages the view that, like any other minority group, children with disabilities are equal members of a diverse society (Jurčević Lozančić & Kudek Mirošević, 2015). The ultimate goal is for the approach towards people with disabilities to evolve from a medical to a social model. Whilst the medical model views individuals in terms of their disabilities, the social model is people-centred and views a disability as just one aspect of a person’s life. A culturally sensitive approach treats a disability as a particular social characteristic that makes a person different, in the same way as their gender or ethnicity. Moreover, a social constructionist approach moves even further away from the medical model. Anastasiou and Kauffman (2011) suggest that disability is a product of the social and economic structures that exclude people with disabilities from mainstream social activities and turn them into an oppressed minority group (p. 371). The authors conclude that disability is neither a personal tragedy nor something that needs to be fixed. Inclusive education is supported by the idea that people in society should provide mutual support, not just as a matter of free will but as a social imperative within an inclusive, democratic society. In the twenty-first century, inclusive education cannot be considered separately from general perspectives on education. UNESCO promotes four pillars that should provide the basis of education: learning to know,

4  Inclusive Society Within the Framework of a Transitioning Society: Examples…

79

learning to do, learning to be and learning to live together (Delors et al., 1996). In School for Life, the Croatian Ministry of Science and Education’s (2019) most recent educational reform document, there is an emphasis on developing generic competencies for further lifelong learning and on broader educational outcomes than simply acquiring knowledge (e.g. creativity, critical thinking, taking initiative, developing responsibility and social participation). Accepting and nurturing diversity is not seen as an obstacle, but rather as an opportunity for every member of society to develop their individual qualities; this refers to every child in the education system (Karamatić Brčić, 2012). The ideal for an inclusive school is one that every child is happy to attend, where the curriculum is adjusted to each individual, where diversity is accepted and celebrated, and the entire school community is committed to the goal of education in its fullest sense (Vican, 2013). Finally, inclusive education has moved away from the idea that the education system should lead to certain educational outcomes, in terms of skills and knowledge, which would benefit society economically. The inclusive model places the child at the centre; rather than meeting general standards, each child is expected to achieve standards that are in accordance with their individual developmental needs, capacities and interests (Jurčević Lozančić & Kudek Mirošević, 2015). Inclusive education also means an affirmation of every aspect of a child’s development, not solely in the narrow terms of educational outcomes (Kudek Mirošević, 2012). In this sense, education processes should contribute to the needs of different children in terms of safety, activities offered, self-respect, acceptance and self-actualisation; this should be based not on general social standards but on individually defined levels (Karamatić Brčić, 2012). Hence, this means that schools should welcome all children as unique individuals with a right to fulfil their own potential rather than the requirements set by a general social framework. Currently, school curricula are a mode of exclusion as they are based on average intellectual and physical competencies (Vican, 2013). Students who fail to achieve these standards, due to whatever circumstances, will sometimes exclude themselves or will be excluded from a school life that consists of complex interactions both in the classroom and in the wider school environment (Vican, 2013). Whilst integration refers to individuals adapting to the system, inclusion would suggest changing that system in order to enable an individual to reach their full potential (Livazović, 2008). There is no doubt that integration was a path towards reducing barriers, but this approach assumes that a child is able to reach standards of ‘normality’ as a precondition for participation in regular social processes (Sunko, 2016, p. 616). The concept of integration was based on perceived similarities rather than acknowledged differences (Karamatić Brčić, 2012). In an inclusive society, every adult and child has a right to participate. As noted in Article 3 of the Salamanca Framework for Action: ‘The guiding principle … is that schools should accommodate all children regardless of their physical, intellectual, social, emotional, linguistic or other conditions’ (UNESCO, 1994, Article 3, p.  6). Hence, following this logic, the school should adapt to the child, and not the child to the school (Kranjčec

80

N. Žganec and A. Opačić

Mlinarić, Žic Ralić, & Lisak, 2016). According to Vican (2013), education should be an open process with a moral obligation to support personal development, rather than to ensure a particular level of attainment that is defined as successful. This discourse should be about educational development, rather than educational achievements or outcomes. Applying an inclusive approach to education leads to a radical transformation of an education system as a whole. Formal education institutions are legitimised within society through their role of regulating access to employment and are based on prescribed outcomes, primarily in terms of knowledge and skills. As applying an inclusive approach requires radical change, some authors suggest taking a more practical approach. For example, Mitchell (2008) understands inclusive education as making adjustments in regular education settings (not radically transformed ones); these adjustments include curriculum, teaching methods, assessment techniques and spatial accessibility. In his work, Mitchell (2008) advocates a more pragmatic or ‘what works’ approach. Redefining curricula and assessment in a way that questions the traditional role of education is a major challenge. There is a need for a single curriculum, which is accessible to all learners, and which respects the fact that learners can function on two or three levels. Designing an accessible curriculum requires modifications, substitutions and task compensation, as well as the omission of highly complex tasks. Mitchell’s approach (2008) does not reject the idea of assessment but rather suggests new perspectives on it. Assessment models that rank all student groups are not compatible with inclusive education. An alternative is to define assessment as a process that promotes capacities for learning and measuring individual outcomes without ranking them at a group level. This approach regards assessment as something that supports all those involved in the teaching process, enabling them to regularly increase an individual’s outcomes and to develop individualised education plans. In Croatian schools, there is a crucial need for a shift in approach to reduce frustration about the current limitations in both mainstream and inclusive education; the aim should be to implement an inclusive culture in all education settings. However, many key stakeholders in Croatia have not yet accepted this conceptual shift, and there are thus still many obstacles to achieving this ideal. Several aspects of the current model reflect an integration rather than an inclusion approach. Against this backdrop, there is a need for major change within the Croatian education system to enable the principle of inclusion to become a marker of quality (Karamatić Brčić, 2013). First of all, as inclusion is a wide-ranging process, a new political framework for education is required at all levels – from preschool to tertiary education (Karamatić Brčić, 2012). Furthermore, many aspects of the school system need to change; these range from changing organisational structures to motivating teaching staff to learn new techniques and methods that are suited to a variety of special educational needs (Karamatić Brčić, 2012; Kranjčec Mlinarić et  al., 2016). Teachers need to create inclusive classroom environments and engage relevant stakeholders in their social surroundings (Karamatić Brčić, 2012, 2013).

4  Inclusive Society Within the Framework of a Transitioning Society: Examples…

81

However, in order to successfully implement such changes, societal attitudes towards education, disabilities and children with special needs need to change amongst children, parents, experts and the population as a whole (Karamatić Brčić, 2012). All stakeholders in the teaching process should participate in the creation of an inclusive society as a meaningful goal; this includes other students and their parents, because peer acceptance is of key importance to every child. Inclusive education also means developing an inclusive school culture and community (Karamatić Brčić, 2012). Teachers and educators are role models for children in developing such a culture (Prović, Hrvatin, & Skočić MIhić, 2015); their personalities, values, motives and expertise are essential in creating an environment that encourages mutual acceptance and supports personal growth (Kranjčec Mlinarić et al., 2016). In an education system that has so far been rigid, resistant to change and not particularly open to dialogue, this is no easy task. Furthermore, many teachers completed their training in an entirely different social and ideological environment. As existing lifelong learning programmes are as yet insufficient and in need of expansion, acquiring the new skills and knowledge required to successfully implement inclusion presents a challenge. 4.2.1.1  Current Achievements in Inclusive Education in Croatia Since 1980, there has been a legal requirement for all children with disabilities to be enrolled in general education programmes (Zrilić & Brzoja, 2013). Initially, integration processes were implemented; however, in the 1990s, the agenda shifted to a focus on inclusion (Rudelić et al., 2013). Since that time, there have been numerous legislative acts to support these processes (Rudelić et al., 2013). However, progress has been slower than expected. According to recent statistical data for the 2016–2017 school year, there were in total 143,878 children in preschool programmes, 319,204 in primary schools and 162,556 in secondary education (Croatian Bureau of Statistics, 2017). These figures include 5650 children with disabilities in regular preschool programmes, 17,602 in primary schools and 6245 in secondary education (Office of the Ombudsperson for Persons with Disabilities, 2017). At secondary level, the enrolment of students with special needs in mainstream schools is much lower than at primary level. In addition, there are still some special schools: 3345 children were enrolled in preschool programmes, 1648  in primary school and 2778  in secondary education (Croatian Bureau of Statistics, 2017; Office of the Ombudsperson for Persons with Disabilities, 2017). In recent years, there has been a move towards more visible inclusive education practice in Croatia; this is set against a backdrop of new legislation, growing debate amongst professionals and an increase in public awareness. Whilst teachers and educators generally view inclusion in a positive light (Kranjčec Mlinarić et  al., 2016), there are still many challenges to address. Over the past 10  years, it has

82

N. Žganec and A. Opačić

become more common to find several pupils with various special needs in a regular classroom environment. However, special education settings still play a significant role in the education system, and the implementation of inclusion is at a very early stage. Inclusive education applies an individual approach, which involves developing individual plans for children with special needs in preschool, primary and secondary education (Prović et al., 2015). A formal document is created to track the most effective methods and procedures for a specific child. The idea is to include a child in as many activities as possible by adjusting tasks for individual children as required. Significant support is provided by specialised assistants within the school or kindergarten, and it is essential that the provision of such support is maintained in the long term (Kranjčec Mlinarić et al., 2016). The inclusion of children with disabilities in mainstream education enables them to develop their social networks and form friendships with peers; these elements are crucial in facilitating full socialisation. An inclusive setting benefits all students in terms of developing tolerance and respect, and expanding socio-emotional competencies (Kranjčec Mlinarić et  al., 2016). Some research shows that in inclusive learning environments, parents and pupils tend to have a more positive attitude towards teachers’ work (Kudek Mirošević, 2015). In line with the shift towards inclusive education, teacher education is also changing; learning about how to understand and support children with special needs is now an integral part of teacher and educator training (Jurčević Lozančić & Kudek Mirošević, 2015). To some extent, inclusive education is merging the boundaries between special and mainstream education. Tertiary education still presents a challenge in an inclusive society. An increasing number of students with disabilities are now enrolling in higher education programmes, and universities have established special offices to support them. A legal framework is in place, and scholarships, residential solutions and transport options for students with special needs have been developed (Bošković et al., 2017). There are no exact or reliable data regarding the number of students with disabilities attending Croatian universities; however, estimates range between 364 and 700 students (Kiš Glavaš et al., 2016). Developing inclusive education and an inclusive society is an ongoing process. Future measures, such as planned educational reforms and technological developments, are likely to support the progression of this process (Livazović, 2008). In order to achieve the ideal of inclusive education, several obstacles need to be overcome. Croatia’s education system lacks the flexibility to easily transform into an inclusive setting. The rigid structures limit teachers’ ability to adjust curricula, develop their own approaches or apply innovative teaching methods (Kudek Mirošević, 2012). Furthermore, insufficient financial and human resources hinder the transition to an inclusive culture (Karamatić Brčić, 2012).

4  Inclusive Society Within the Framework of a Transitioning Society: Examples…

83

Typically, class sizes are too big, schools do not have enough professional experts and teachers lack the training required to teach effectively in inclusive settings (Zrilić & Brzoja, 2013). In addition, schools do not have the appropriate facilities, there is insufficient time to focus on individual children, and professional support is inadequate – there are few classroom assistants. As a result, teachers do not feel motivated about or open to inclusive education (Kranjčec Mlinarić et al., 2016). The Croatian system still maintains many features of an integrative system, rather than an inclusive one. The debate on inclusion is focused on how to make space for children with disabilities within the mainstream education system, as opposed to how to change that system to create space for children with different needs. There are very few examples of genuine attempts to bring about real changes to social structures. A great deal of work is still required in order to change attitudes and strengthen the competencies and skills of education professionals (Bouillet & Loborec, 2012; Kranjčec Mlinarić et al., 2016; Rudelić et al., 2013). Research suggests that although younger teachers and educators have a higher level of education, they feel less confident developing individual learning plans (Jurčević Lozančić & Kudek Mirošević, 2015). In addition, teachers who only teach individual subjects at a higher level (grade 5 and above) are perceived as less competent at dealing with classroom dynamics than lower primary level class teachers (in grades one to four) (Kudek Mirošević, 2012). Research conducted in kindergartens found that although educators have a high level of awareness about specific learning difficulties (in this case ADHD), they tend to rate their competencies for working with children with special needs as low (Bouillet & Loborec, 2012). There is also a need to raise awareness amongst students and increase their understanding of inclusion as this is not consistent between schools and classes. In schools that specialise in particular subject areas, there is less openness to inclusive education as there is a greater focus on academic achievement and class sizes are larger (Vican, 2013). In addition, children with special needs face greater obstacles developing friendships with peers due to lower levels of acceptance, despite increased opportunities for contact in inclusive settings (Žic Ralić & Ljubas, 2013). Overall, there is a sense that inclusion is an additional responsibility and is not part of the current social reality (Kranjčec Mlinarić et al., 2016); until this perception changes, inclusion will continue to be perceived as a burden. Teachers working in inclusive settings have called for official recognition of their commitment and additional benefits or rewards for their efforts (Kranjčec Mlinarić et al., 2016). Students with disabilities still encounter obstacles to inclusion in relation to academic adjustment. This particularly affects older students, male students and those who are highly dependent on their families (Bošković et al., 2017); these individuals would benefit from additional psychosocial support.

84

N. Žganec and A. Opačić

Box 4.1 Examples from Practice Traditionally, social workers were greatly involved in special education institutions in education centres. These centres, which were previously run by the Croatian Ministry of Education, also functioned as long-term residential social welfare institutions for children and are currently being transformed from educational and residential institutions into community-based providers of support for inclusive education. Social workers have three key roles in inclusive education; the first is a formal role of establishing a child’s special needs status at a social welfare centre. This provides the basis for schools to develop individual plans and recognise a child’s right to educational adjustments. Furthermore, social workers are responsible for developing and managing projects involving classroom assistants. These assistants are financed through the European Social Fund; funding applications are submitted through civil society organisations, and social workers are the project managers. In addition to matching children and classroom assistants, social workers also provide supervision, training and professional guidance for assistants. There are seven elements to the classroom assistant’s role: providing learning support, encouraging social activities in the classroom, cooperating with all participants in the inclusion process, developing a child’s professional skills, developing mutual trust and supporting social inclusion (Drandić, 2017). The social workers’ third and final role involves a unique service called assistance for inclusion in regular education programmes (integration). This is defined as a social service in the Social Welfare Act (Official Gazette, 157/2013) and is provided to teachers and education professionals by social welfare institutions and NGOs. The service is recognised by social welfare centres and is available for a maximum of 5 h/week. It is usually provided by social workers in education centres; they are responsible for sharing their knowledge and expertise regarding effective methods for supporting children with different special needs. This is a formalised type of peer education and is one of the mechanisms for enabling collaboration between two sectors (social work and education).

4.2.2  Inclusion in the Process of Deinstitutionalisation Deinstitutionalisation is a term most often used to describe efforts to reform residential care for children and people with disabilities or mental health issues; it also refers to measures to change the role of such institutions. Whilst there have been efforts to facilitate deinstitutionalisation on multiple levels, the common aims have always been to restore residents’ ties with their families and communities and to create an environment that guarantees their rights. Deinstitutionalisation can be implemented at different levels; it can target an individual residential care institu-

4  Inclusive Society Within the Framework of a Transitioning Society: Examples…

85

tion or a group of institutions. The process may include the development of family-­ based alternatives to residential care, such as guardianship, foster care or adoption. In some cases, it is embodied in social welfare system reforms; examples of this include the transformation of residential care institutions into family support and respite care services, as well as the creation of other opportunities for social inclusion at a local level. Finally, deinstitutionalisation can be framed within broader social policy reforms; these include the restructuring of social protection services, strategies for poverty reduction, and health and education. Whatever the scope of these reform efforts, the objective of deinstitutionalisation is always to guarantee human rights in one or more of the following ways: • Strengthening the role of the family as the key agent for an individual’s survival and development; • Replacing assessment and care based on deficit and medical models with approaches that give people with disabilities equal opportunities to develop and thrive; • Replacing repressive practices for children and young people who come into conflict with the law through the implementation of socialisation responses that are conducive to integration, and which support lifestyles that are accepted within communities and wider society; • Limiting the use of institutional care and upgrading its quality to ensure that it contributes to an individual’s capacity to develop socially and mentally, and to acquire the life skills needed to enable long-lasting relationships and autonomous living. From a historical perspective, the period after World War II was characterised by international momentum in campaigns against discrimination and intolerance in relation to people who were regarded as different due to their religion, skin colour or physical disadvantages. The adoption of the 1945 United Nations Charter and the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights led to the implementation of the human rights model in many countries. The central tenet of the declaration is the universality of human rights, and the international implementation and protection of those rights. However, according to Wolfensberger (1994), for most people with disabilities, implementing human rights was not about psychosocial or political research and debate, it was a matter of survival. The civil rights movement in the 1950s and 1960s, along with new sociological theories, brought about many changes; these included the acknowledgement that all humans should be treated as individuals with independent rights. This in turn led to recognition of the wrongness of certain customs, practices and attitudes. Since that time, a whole range of charters and declarations have been adopted; these relate to various aspects of equality, including the rights of people with disabilities. Alongside the introduction of protective legislation, there have also been significant developments in theory and practice relating to the rehabilitation of people with disabilities. Research on early attempts at deinstitutionalisation in Scandinavia and Great Britain (Mansell, 2005) clearly showed that it is possible to provide adequate care for people with intellectual disabilities within communities and that this

86

N. Žganec and A. Opačić

removes the need for the institutional care (Mansell, 2005). The key processes that contribute to this are social integration and normalisation (Culham & Nind, 2003). During the 1970s and 1980s, the concept of normalisation was introduced in several Scandinavian countries and was soon adopted in many other developed nations. The principle of normalisation ‘means making available … patterns and conditions of everyday life which are as close as possible to the norms and patterns of the mainstream of society’ (Nirje, 1969, p. 19); this creates normal surroundings for people with disabilities. The concept of integration emerged alongside the normalisation trend (Council of Europe, 2003). Integration refers to people with disabilities adapting to the existing living and working conditions of the majority; at the same time, it also involves society adapting to people with disabilities. For individuals with disabilities, social integration is the most important aspect of integration; this means acceptance within the community, a fulfilling family and social life, access to mainstream education and workplaces, social responsibilities in micro and macro groups, leisure time activities and access to cultural resources, as well as other formal and informal opportunities in society. In the 1990s, the concept of inclusion emerged as a kind of upgrade to the process of normalisation. This philosophy aims for the full inclusion of people with various types of special needs in a broader social environment and seeks equality in line with the rights of the average population. Inclusion is based on the fundamental principle that everyone is a member of society and contributes to it in their own way; this creates new relationships to the idea of difference. According to this philosophy, diversity is positive; it is an asset and a strength in society. The philosophy of inclusion laid the foundations for the current rehabilitation model for people with disabilities. Known as the social model, it has a positive orientation towards an individual’s strengths and abilities, rather than focusing on their limitations and problems. The starting point for this model is recognising that the situation of people with disabilities is socially determined (Freyhoff, Parker, Coué, & Greig, 2004). This recognition brought about changes in approaches to people with disabilities. There is now an emphasis on deinstitutionalisation, de-­ hospitalisation and regionalisation, as well as on establishing community support services. Deinstitutionalisation and de-hospitalisation thus represent operational models of inclusion, normalisation and individualisation. This implies: • Integration into the social environment through regional support services; • Living in a family setting (biological, adopted or fostered); • Establishing normal living conditions for people with disabilities, alongside a spectrum of services focusing on housing, education, employment and leisure time; • Providing an individual approach and respecting specific needs to enable optimal physical, psychological, spiritual, social and emotional development. The self-advocacy movement for people with disabilities played a key role both in changing attitudes towards disability and in the development of the social model. This is one of the most interesting and positive social movements in recent years.

4  Inclusive Society Within the Framework of a Transitioning Society: Examples…

87

4.2.2.1  A  chievements and Obstacles in the Process of Deinstitutionalisation In the Western world, deinstitutionalisation is generally associated with mental health institutions; there are two main approaches to deinstitutionalisation: the human rights perspective and the neoliberal approach. Gooding (2016) suggests that in Australia, deinstitutionalisation was legitimised within the anti-psychiatric movement as a legacy of critical thought. However, the neoliberal approach to reducing the impact of welfare policies provided a strong incentive for implementing deinstitutionalisation in practice. Deinstitutionalisation is hence associated with neoliberalism. A similar dualism has been observed in Bulgaria and the United Kingdom (Mladenov, 2015), where there were points of agreement between disability rights campaigners and neoliberal governments; both parties acknowledged that ­institutions have a disabling influence, provide poor value for money, that opportunities for self-determination were reduced and that the state should interfere less in people’s lives (p. 452). In Croatia, the situation was different. Deinstitutionalisation began in 2001 when the Social Democratic Party came to power; furthermore, austerity measures were not a major issue. Deinstitutionalisation was strongly promoted within human rights discourse in connection with international organisations (such as UNDP, Open Society and UNICEF) and national civil society organisations. The driving force was not a social movement, but rather a joint agreement between NGOs, the government and international organisations. As discussed earlier, resistance to reforms often came from within social welfare institutions and wider society; there were considerable efforts to convince the general public that deinstitutionalisation was the right way forward. The process of deinstitutionalisation often depends on numerous factors (both political and professional), which can rapidly accelerate or slow down the process. One of the most important success factors in Croatia was the level of decentralisation in the public sector (Pavičić Kaselj, 2011). This was formally adopted and approved by the government in 2001, and shortly afterwards, the first national study on deinstitutionalisation was conducted. The study provided a comprehensive insight into the national social care system and recommended strategies and measures to be implemented in the forthcoming deinstitutionalisation process. Unfortunately, due to the lack of political will, the strategy was not carried out as planned and was replaced with several new strategies and measures in the years that followed. It was not that politicians had issues with the idea of deinstitutionalisation, it was the cost of the transition that they were unwilling to accept. Deinstitutionalisation was never considered a cheaper solution. At the same time, decision-makers were careful in their dealings with the concerns of the significant number of staff in institutions who feared they would lose their jobs. As shown in Fig.  4.2, the number of employees working in the disability care sector actually increased in the period up to 2014; employment figures later decreased, however, this was mostly due to staff retiring.

88

N. Žganec and A. Opačić

All this contributed to the slow progress of the deinstitutionalisation process in Croatia, and there are still an unacceptably high number of people in institutions. However, over the years, institutions have developed a wide range of community based-services, such as counselling, mobile teams, early intervention and psychosocial support. Approximately 30% of users are not permanently resident in institutions; however, as they are still included in the figures, the total number of users has changed very little (Figs. 4.1 and 4.2). Over time, deinstitutionalisation efforts in Croatia produced some positive results: • An increase in family support and alternative care arrangements within the social protection system; • Greater awareness about the meaning and importance of the process both amongst professionals in the social protection system and citizens; • Higher numbers of people in family substitute care compared with those placed in residential care; • Lower numbers of new placements in residential care, despite rather slow progress (see Table 4.1);

Fig. 4.1  The structure of social care homes, and the number of residents 2004–2017. (Source: Ministry of Demographics, Family, Youth and Social Policy, 2018)

4  Inclusive Society Within the Framework of a Transitioning Society: Examples…

89

Fig. 4.2  The structure of social care homes, and the number of residents and employees 2004– 2017. (Source: Ministry of Demographics, Family, Youth and Social Policy, 2018) Table 4.1  Residents newly placed in foster families and social care homes 2012–2016 Type of placement Children and young people placed in foster families Children and young people placed in social care homes Elderly people and other adults placed in social care homes

2012 2100 2844 10,372

2013 2204 2571 9891

2014 2403 1677 9536

2015 2218 1686 9508

2016 2342 1432 9922

(Source: Ministry of Demographics, Family, Youth and Social Policy, 2018)

• The ministry responsible for social protection introduced quality standards for services and service providers; this led to improved living conditions for users in both institutional and community care; • New systemic gate-keeping procedures and accountability indicators for decision-­makers were applied in relation to the use of residential care in case management. Entry points for initiating the deinstitutionalisation process may differ depending on the scope of the reform mandate. Whatever the scope, it is essential to map out the constraints and facilitating factors in order to ensure that reform objectives are achieved; this needs to be carried out at various levels, both within and outside the scope of the specific reform mandate. This process also reveals the differences in the interests, access to information and power bases of particular stakeholders, as well as the ways in which they might challenge reform objectives and slow down the

90

N. Žganec and A. Opačić

pace of implementation. Hence, skills and competencies that facilitate dialogue, negotiations and advocacy are essential ingredients in reform processes. Even in supportive environments, the initial plans and timescales for achieving reform goals may have to be adjusted during the reform process. It is important to bear in mind that, although different interventions may aim to achieve the same goal, the amount of time required to implement them can differ significantly. For example, the physical infrastructure for family-based services may already exist at the beginning of a reform process; however, for processes such as assessing potential demand, developing new standards for services, or staff training and deployment, different timescales apply. Furthermore, available resources need to be periodically reviewed to evaluate desirable outcomes and processes of change. Even if a reform process is carefully planned from the outset, the resources might turn out to be insufficient and it may be necessary to reduce the scope of the expected outcomes or to prolong the timescale for completion. For example, developing and implementing new legislation is a common and necessary reform goal; however, it tends to involve a longer ­timescale. In addition, legislative changes do not guarantee changes in the attitudes and practices of service providers or decision-makers. Additional normative and administrative acts, and capacity-building plans need to be developed in order to bring about such changes. Whilst the deinstitutionalisation process is currently outlined in strategic planning documents, it has not been written into law. In order to manage reforms with a national scope, a strategic framework was required during the transition period. This framework was designed to complement the current regulatory framework. Its main function is to maintain motivation amongst existing and potential service providers through financial and professional incentives. Service providers are offered training opportunities in exchange for providing new social care service options. In some cases, a type of transition management framework can be designed in order to prevent system fragmentation; this enables service restructuring to be coordinated and ensures that any costs are covered until the system is ready to incorporate new services and practices alongside its regular functions. During the transition period, financial means have to be assured for formal assessments, studies and proposals for new normative and financial rules. This process should be both participatory and feasible. At the same time, a demand-driven financial mechanism should be put in place to pilot alternative services and upgrade existing ones in accordance with the desired quality standards. The aim of this mechanism is primarily to motivate stakeholders who have already been identified within the reform goals. Thus, service delivery efforts that have been identified as family centred and empowering can be accommodated in the transition management framework at different system levels for both governmental and non-governmental stakeholders. The establishment of transition management frameworks is not common practice in countries that are in the process of implementing social protection reforms; one reason for this may be the absence of a systemic approach to reform processes.

4  Inclusive Society Within the Framework of a Transitioning Society: Examples…

91

Reform efforts generally include changes to social protection and care legislation, as well as the provision of corresponding training. Due to budgetary constraints, financing for social services expansion is often sought through short-term funding programmes. Stronger links with system reform goals would enable these short-­ term investments to contribute to the long-term restructuring of services and to support the sustainability of new programmes. Similarly, sporadic short-term funding of NGOs and pilot projects related to deinstitutionalisation does not contribute to systemic changes unless such projects are synchronised with public policy reforms. The reluctance of donors to support reform efforts at a national level is largely based on the myth that any project that starts at a national level will have no real chance of contributing to decentralised service delivery, local government reforms or the autonomy of civil society. This over-simplified view does not take into account the state’s regulatory role and its obligation to ensure that all its citizens have equal access to quality services. The state can provide funding to less developed municipalities to ensure that these obligations are met and that laws are enforced; furthermore, some public functions can be delegated to non-governmental entities. Only a very small budget share of overall social sector expenditure is allocated to social protection services, and a large proportion of this supports existing ­institutional care at the expense of alternative services. To reverse this situation, a financial reordering is needed and this must be accompanied by a client-oriented approach that is consistent with the human rights paradigm. To achieve long-term social protection goals, it is essential that a critical mass of innovations in service delivery is created in the medium term. In addition to service expansion, such services can also contribute to general reform processes centred around establishing new quality standards and gate-keeping systems, as well as the reordering of financial flows and organisational learning. Reforming the social protection system requires short- and medium-term planning, as well as the establishment of management frameworks that allow for innovations and for the partial deregulation of the existing system. As discussed earlier, the design and implementation of a transition management framework should contribute to the harmonisation of bottom-up and top-down efforts, to the inclusion of multiple service providers in public services and to improved access and choice for those who need support.

4.3  C  onclusion: The Role of Social Work in an Inclusive Transition Society In Croatia, it is almost impossible to consider social work practice separately from the social welfare system as this profession is still closely linked to the to the system’s formal structure. The post-socialist transition of the social welfare system demonstrates the phenomenon of anamorphosis (von Bertalanffy, Juarrero, &

92

N. Žganec and A. Opačić

Box 4.2 Social Work’s Contribution to the Deinstitutionalisation Process Social workers play a central role in developing and coordinating the community-­based services that are a precondition for deinstitutionalisation and true inclusion. This work is carried out via transformed social welfare homes or NGOs. The Dugave Centre in Zagreb (centar-dugave.hr) is an example of a successfully transformed institution that provides community-based services. The centre, which was previously a home for young people with behavioural problems, now focuses on collaborating with schools and developing preventive and outreach programmes in the community. It also provides counselling and family support. Social workers use their wide range of skills and knowledge to regularly develop new services. The project also provides housing; however, the number of permanent young residents has been significantly reduced. The Association for Promoting Inclusion (inkluzija.hr/eng) provides a second example. This civil society organisation is a strong advocate of deinstitutionalisation, particularly for people with intellectual disabilities. When the term inclusion is mentioned in a Croatian context, most social welfare professionals will immediately think of a programme developed by this non-­ governmental organisation: a community-based supported housing model that facilitates inclusive living for 337 people with intellectual disabilities in 10 cities across the country. This model involves one to five people sharing an apartment or house with the provision of daily support from professionals. Social workers provide direct assistance but also coordinate different supporting activities and services. The Association for Promoting Inclusion also initiated another unique organisation for people with intellectual disabilities in Croatia: the Association for Self-Advocacy (samozastupanje.hr). With its motto always active, always included, this truly community-based self-help group holds meetings three times a week. The group empowers it members by organising regular events and providing up-to-date information on disability rights. Its social mission is to promote independent living and empower its members to become self-advocators.

Rubino, 2008); as it expands to include new structural elements and more service providers and regulatory mechanisms, its structure is becoming increasingly complex. As a result, it has become more difficult to balance processes on both horizontal and vertical levels. This complexity is evident in a series of transformations within the system: from a vertical to a more horizontal structure encompassing a wider range of local stakeholders, from sustainable to less sustainable forms of management and from unified, prescribed procedures to more participatory processes of decision-making. Furthermore, there has been a shift from a top-down

4  Inclusive Society Within the Framework of a Transitioning Society: Examples…

93

approach (where the state sets a frame for field practice) to a more bottom-up approach (where new practices are developed with support from EU funds and other sources), hence creating a collage of exemplary community-based practices. The concept of inclusive society ties in with the ongoing restructuring of the social welfare system. The apprehension about this shift felt by many social workers may explain the slow pace and lack of holism in the inclusion process. In addition, social workers feel discouraged by the lack of continuity in terms of decision-­ making. For example, since 2011, the Social Welfare Act was amended six times. Ilijaš and Podobnik (2018) concluded that the social welfare system creates uncertainty for both beneficiaries and social workers. The role of social workers in the reform process has not been distinguished from that of other care professionals involved; instead, the focus has been on ensuring that institutions continue to function well, rather than on specific professional roles. As described earlier in this chapter, the concept of inclusive society in Croatia is limited to inclusive education and deinstitutionalisation. In a current social work context, inclusion is understood and implemented as follows: • Inclusion within public systems (mostly education): In this context, social work supports equal opportunities and the avoidance of segregation; social workers act as mediators between families, the education system and institutions. They provide support services for teaching staff and aid the development of inclusive practices. Social workers supervise the implementation of a child’s inclusion into a regular school programme, they share their special education expertise and are responsible for assigning in-school assistants. • Inclusion within local communities (i.e., neighbourhoods, community activities and community services): In recent years, EU funding has supported the development of social work practice in this field; this mostly involves civil society organisations and transformed social care homes. Social workers are engaged in developing community-based services, such as community centres, mobile teams and employment support for vulnerable groups. This also involves volunteer programmes, as well as inclusive volunteering. • Inclusion within informal social support networks: In this field, social workers have the potential to contribute far more than they do at present. Social workers could play a more significant role in advocating the value of inclusive society within the wider community. This would support a gradual progression towards a society that accepts and celebrates diversity. • Inclusion within support groups (this can also refer to inclusion within particular minority groups or formal support organisations [NGOs]): As mentioned earlier, there are a number of self-advocacy and self-help groups in Croatia; social workers from civil society organisations provide expert support for these groups. There is the potential to further develop participatory processes and to expand inclusive practices involving active group members. • Inclusion as a way of living (mainly residential settings for people with intellectual disabilities as an alternative to living in an institution): In this context, the social workers’ role is to mediate between institutions and alternative housing

94

N. Žganec and A. Opačić

(residential communities or foster families). They provide in-house support and work within institutions and in the community. This has led to a parallelism of inclusive and exclusive social practices, which involves both traditional and alternative perspectives on social work with people with disabilities. • Inclusion as a process of social change, which reinforces social work as a human rights profession: Social workers are and should continue to be active players in defending and promoting human rights. In societies where there is limited public discussion on the broader meaning of human rights (especially in relation to the rights of the most disadvantaged members of society), social work can play a critical role in raising public awareness and improving human rights standards. • Inclusion as a process of changing the basis and focus of social work: Social work’s orientation towards social inclusion creates the potential for this profession to reimagine its own role in society. As emphasised by Rose (1987): ‘If new, socially constructed paradigms and practice models are not forthcoming, the field is at risk from increasing exclusion in favour of less expensive, more acquiescent professions more amenable to medical models of care, medical hierarchies and medical institutions’ (p. 256). Further progress is needed to ensure that inclusive processes are the only social care option, or at least the dominant one. Within government institutions and NGOs, the role of social workers needs to be expanded and fine-tuned; social workers should be key partners and central to the inclusion process. As the social welfare system is considered both a driver of and obstacle to change, the restructuring of that system plays a crucial role.

References Anastasiou, D., & Kauffman, J.  M. (2011). A social constructionist approach to disability: Implications for special education. Exceptional Children, 77(3), 367–384. https://doi. org/10.1177/001440291107700307 Bošković, S., Ilić-Stošović, D., & Skočić-Mihić, S. (2017). Prilagodba na studij s obzirom na neka obilježja studenata s invaliditetom. Revija za Socijalnu Politiku, 24(1), 73–92. Bouillet, D., & Loborec, M. (2012). Istraživanje procjena odgojitelja o mogućnosti inkluzije djece s ADHD-om u redovni program dječjih vrtića. Napredak, 153(1), 21–38. Council of Europe. (2003). Rehabilitation and integration of people with disabilities: Policy and legislation. Report drawn up by the Committee on the Rehabilitation and Integration of People with disabilities (Partial Agreement). Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://rm.coe. int/16805a2a15 Croatian Bureau of Statistics. (2017). Statistički ljetopis Republike Hrvatske. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://www.dzs.hr/Hrv_Eng/ljetopis/2017/sljh2017.pdf Culham, A., & Nind, M. (2003). Deconstructing normalisation: Clearing the way for inclusion. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, 28(1), 65–78. Delors, J., Al Mufti, I., Amagi, I., Carneiro, R., Chung, F., Geremek, B., et al. (1996). Learning: The treasure within. Report to UNESCO of the international commission on education for the twenty-first century. Paris: UNESCO Publishing.

4  Inclusive Society Within the Framework of a Transitioning Society: Examples…

95

Dominelli, L. (1996). Deprofessionalizing social work: Anti-oppressive practice, competencies and postmodernism. British Journal of Social Work, 26(2), 153–175. Drandić, D. (2017). Uloga pomoćnika u nastaviu provođenju inkluzivnoga obrazovanja. Napredak, 158(4), 439–459. Freyhoff, G., Parker, C., Coué, M., & Greig, N. (2004). Included in society: Results and recommendations of the European research initiative on community-based residential alternatives for disabled people. Brussels: Inclusion Europe, Autism Europe, Mental Health Europe & The Open Society Mental Health Initiative. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://cps.ceu.edu/ sites/cps.ceu.edu/files/included-in-society-results-and-recommendations-2004.pdf Gooding, P. (2016). From deinstitutionalisation to consumer empowerment: Mental health policy, neoliberal restructuring and the closure of the ‘big bins’ in Victoria. Health Sociology Review, 25(1), 33–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/14461242.2015.1134261 Ilijaš, A., & Podobnik, M. (2018). Nestabilnost zakona o socijalnoj skrbi – kako utječe na rad socijalnih radnika u centrima za socijalnu skrb? Ljetopis Socijalnog Rada, 25(3), 427–450. https:// doi.org/10.3935/ljsr.v25i3.242 Jurčević Lozančić, A., & Kudek Mirošević, J. (2015). Konstruktivizam u suvremenom inkluzivnom odgoju i obrazovanju. Školski Vjesnik: Časopis za Pedagogijsku Teoriju i Praksu, 64(4), 541–560. Karamatić Brčić, M. (2012). Implementacija i provedba inkluzivnog odgoja i obrazovanja u sustavu redovnih škola. Magistra Iadertina, 7(1), 101–109. Karamatić Brčić, M. (2013). Pretpostavke inkluzuje u školi. Život i Škola, 30(2), 67–78. Kiš Glavaš, L., & National working group for improvements of social dimension of higher education (2016). Smjernice za unapređenje sustava potpore studentima s invaliditetom u visokom obrazovanju u Republici Hrvatskoj. Retrieved March 20, 2020, from http://www.unizg.hr/fileadmin/rektorat/Studiji_studiranje/Podrska/SSI/Smjernice_LKG_2016.pdf Kranjčec Mlinarić, J., Žic Ralić, A., & Lisak, N. (2016). Promišljanje učitelja o izazovima i barijerama inkluzije učenika s poteškoćama u razvoju. Školski Vjesnik: Časopis za Pedagogijsku Teoriju, 65, 233–247. Kudek Mirošević, J. (2012). Percepcija razredničkih kompetencija učenika nižih i viših razreda osnovne škole. Kriminologija i Socijalna Integracija: Casopis za Kriminologiju, Penologiju i Poremecaje u Ponasanju, 20(2), 47–58. Kudek Mirošević, J. (2015). Indicators of inclusion implementation in the process of school self-­ evaluation. Croatian Journal of Education, 17(1), 207–218. Kudek Mirošević, J. (2016). The assessment of the competences of students at the Department of Teacher Education Studies and of the teachers for inclusive practice. Croatian Journal of Education, 18(1), 71–86. Livazović, G. (2008). Primjena računalne tehnologije u odgoju i obrazovanju djece s posebnim potrebama. Život i Škola, 19, 79–86. Mansell, J. (2005). Institutionalisation and community living: An international perspective. In Housing, care and support. Brighton: Pavilion Publishing. Ministry of Demographics, Family, Youth and Social Policy. (2018). Statistical reports. Retrieved March 18, 2020, from https://mdomsp.gov.hr/pristup-informacijama/ statisticka-izvjesca-1765/1765 Ministry of Health and Social Welfare. (2007). Joint Memorandum on Social Inclusion of the Republic of Croatia. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://mdomsp.gov.hr/UserDocsImages// arhiva/files/16830//JIM-signedl_050307.pdf Ministry of Science and Education. (2019). Vrednovanje eksperimentalnoga programa Škola za život u školskoj godini 2018/2019. Retrieved March 18, 2020. Mitchell, D. (2008). What really works in special and inclusive education. Using evidence-based teaching strategies. New York: Routledge. Mladenov, T. (2015). Neoliberalism, postsocialism, disability. Disability & Society, 30(3), 445– 459. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2015.1021758

96

N. Žganec and A. Opačić

Nirje, B. (1969). The normalization principle and its human management implications. In R. Kugel & W. Wolfensberger (Eds.), Changing patterns in residential services for the mentally retarded (pp. 159–177). Washington, DC: President’s Committee on Mental Retardation. Office of the Ombudsperson for Persons with Disabilities. (2017). Izvješće o radu za 2017. godinu. Retrieved March 18, 2020, from http://posi.hr/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/ Izvje%C5%A1%C4%87e-o-radu-Pravobranitelja-za-osobe-s-invaliditetom-2017.pdf Parton, N. (2000). Some thoughts on the relationship between theory and practice in and for social work. British Journal of Social Work, 30(4), 449–463. Pavičić Kaselj, A. (2011). Decentralisation, power of local self-government and multi-level dynamics in Istria Region. In R.  Coletti (Ed.), Territorial Cohesion: definition of the concept and implications for territorial cooperation (pp. 83–98). Rome: Centro Studi di Politica Internazionale. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://www.cespi.it/sites/default/files/documenti/third_report-full_0.pdf Prović, P., Hrvatin, V., & Skočić MIhić, S. (2015). Odgajatelj u radu s djecom s kroničnim bolestima. Magistra Iadertina, 10(1), 103–113. Puljiz, V. (2006). Social policy and social activities in Croatia in the period from 1900 until 1960. Ljetopis Socijalnog Rada, 13(1), 7–28. Rose, S.  M. (1987). Deinstitutionalization  – A structurally generated opportunity. International Social Work, 30(3), 251–257. Rudelić, A., Pinoza-Kukurin, Z., & Skočić Mihić, S. (2013). Stručna znanja i materijalni resursi u inkluziji: stanje i perspektive. Napredak, 154(1-2), 131–148. Social Welfare Act. (2013). Official Gazette § 157. Sunko, E. (2016). Društveno povijesni kontekst odgoja i obrazovanja djece s teškoćama u razvoju. Školski Vjesnik: Časopis za Pedagogijsku Teoriju i Praksu, 65(4), 601–620. UNESCO. (1994). The Salamanca statement and framework for action on special needs education. Adopted by the World Conference on special needs education: access and quality. Retrieved March 18, 2020, from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000098427 United Nations Development Programme. (2006). Unplugged: Faces of social exclusion in Croatia. Human Development Report Croatia 2006. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from http://hdr.undp. org/sites/default/files/croatia_2006_en.pdf Vican, D. (2013). Inkluzivna kultura osnovnih škola u Hrvatskoj s gledišta učenika. Život i Škola, 30(2), 17–37. von Bertalanffy, L., Juarrero, A., & Rubino, C. A. (2008). An outline of general system theory. Emergence: Complexity and Organization, 10(2), 103–123. Wolfensberger, W. (1994). The growing threat to the lives of handicapped people in the context of modernistic values. Disability & Society, 9(3), 395–413. Žic Ralić, A., & Ljubas, M. (2013). Prihvaćenost i prijateljstvo djece i mladih s teškoćama u razvoju. Društvena Istraživanja, 22(3), 435–453. Zrilić, S., & Brzoja, K. (2013). Promjene u pristupima odgoju i obrazovanju učenika s teškoćama. Magistra Iadertina, 8(1), 141–153.

Chapter 5

Social Work and Inclusive Society in Germany Stephan Bundschuh, Ines Arendt, Marion Felder, Robert Frietsch, Esra Herzog, Nadja Högner, Dirk Holbach, Jana Kluge-Wirz, Martin Schmid, and Katrin Schneiders

5.1  Three Discourses on Inclusion The distinction between inclusion and exclusion is a central concept in welfare state analyses and social work theory and practice. At least three discourses can be differentiated here: the discourse on a functionally differentiated society, which considers the concepts of inclusion and exclusion in relation to Niklas Luhmann’s theory of social systems, and research on poverty and social inequality; disability discourse, which looks at the concepts of inclusion and participation in the field of social and educational services and is dominated by the project of creating an inclusive school system; and migration discourse, which uses the term inclusion as a less loaded alternative to integration. Before explaining these different approaches, we will give a short introduction to the German welfare system in order to outline the context of these debates.

5.1.1  An Introduction to German Social Services Since Bismarck’s creation of the social insurance system in the 1880s, the German welfare state has been marked by a division between two substantially different logics: local governments are responsible for the provision of social services, whilst S. Bundschuh (*) · I. Arendt · M. Felder · R. Frietsch · E. Herzog D. Holbach J. Kluge-Wirz · M. Schmid · K. Schneiders Faculty of Social Sciences, Koblenz University of Applied Sciences, Koblenz, Germany e-mail: [email protected] N. Högner Special Education Teacher, Berlin, Germany

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 S. Bundschuh et al. (eds.), Ambivalences of Inclusion in Society and Social Work, European Social Work Education and Practice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55446-0_5

97

98

S. Bundschuh et al.

national social insurance bodies administrate social protection against major risks (e.g. unemployment, ill health and old age). This structure reflects fundamental historic legacies; long before the establishment of the centrally controlled welfare state, local governments provided services, such as support for the poor, both in cooperation and competition with churches. During the nineteenth century, this basic social policy function was expanded to include the areas of public health, child welfare and housing. Since then, a corporatist mode of governance has emerged at a local level and a division of labour has developed between local governments and non-profit organisations. The non-profit sector originated from church parishes and was later organised into welfare associations (Wohlfahrtsverbände) (Grohs, Schneiders, & Heinze, 2017, p. 2576 f.). This established system has faced severe financial constraints. Social services funding has been a controversial issue for at least 30 years, in particular because expenditure has increased as public revenues have stagnated. The social budget in Germany is currently 962 trillion euros (Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Soziales, 2018). More than 40% of the federal budget is used to fund activities in the labour, social affairs and health sectors. A considerable segment of social services is financed by municipalities, which spend about a quarter of their budgets on social measures. This proportion has risen steadily in recent decades and reached 45 trillion euros in 2012 (Grohs & Reiter, 2014, p. 18). With a growing number of elderly people out of work and an increase in life expectancy, demographic changes will lead to escalating costs for health care and care for the elderly (Heinze, Naegele, & Schneiders, 2011). In addition, social changes, such as the rising number of single-person households, an increase in divorce rates and higher numbers of women in employment, will have an impact on the ability of families to provide care for elderly relatives. Overall, the demand for care will increase as the capacity for self-help decreases (Schneiders, 2010). Other inclusion challenges have emerged in a wider context in relation to migration, poverty and disability. One method of dealing with such pressures has been the implementation of managerial reform measures. These instruments have been modelled according to the international paradigm of New Public Management (Kuhlmann, Bogumil, & Grohs, 2008) and have often been lumped together under the categories of ‘managerialism’ or ‘marketisation’ (Heinze & Schneiders, 2014). Even established social service providers have introduced managerial instruments and logics although they have traditionally been outside the scope of market mechanisms. Despite tendencies towards privatisation and marketisation, the majority of social services in Germany are still provided by non-profit organisations (freigemeinnützige Träger). For decades, the five largest welfare organisations have provided the majority of social services in Germany, and this is reflected both in the number of employees and the extent of facilities. Roughly four million people receive care, treatment, activation and consultation services through these organisations. More than 1.9 million social workers, nurses, doctors and other professionals are currently employed by these charitable organisations in over 118,000 establishments (Bundesarbeitsgemeinschaft der Freien Wohlfahrtspflege, 2018). Since the 1970s, these independent charities have become amongst the largest employers in Germany and are quantitatively comparable to multinational corporations.

5  Social Work and Inclusive Society in Germany

99

5.1.2  Inclusion in the Context of Social Systems The sociologist Niklas Luhmann describes at least three different types of social systems: interaction systems (e.g. university classes, hospital consultations or meetings with friends), organisations (e.g. universities, hospitals or business corporations) and function systems (e.g. politics, economics, sciences, health systems, education or religion). According to Luhmann, modern societies are characterised by the emergence of functional differentiation, starting with the division of labour and the development of specialised jobs, professions and organisations. These function systems operate autonomously in their particular fields on the basis of specific systemic codes and symbolically generalised communication media. In societies with a predominantly segmentary or stratified differentiation, life opportunities and the position of individuals in society are ‘more or less completely predefined’ by birth and membership of families and clans (Schirmer & Michailakis, 2015, p.  53). In modern, functionally differentiated societies, people ‘no longer belong to only one subsystem (clan or estate), but participate simultaneously in different subsystems’ (Braeckman, 2006, p. 68). Furthermore, their life opportunities depend on inclusion in and exclusion from important function systems. Although there are still some types of stratified differentiation, such as income inequality, these play a minor role compared with access to function systems. Moreover, they are self-regulating: ‘With the functional differentiation of the societal system, regulation of the relationship between inclusion and exclusion has passed to functional systems, and there is no longer a central authority (however much politics seeks to appropriate this function) to supervise the subsystems in this regard’ (Luhmann, 2013, p. 24). Function systems tend to extend their boundaries towards a universalism of inclusion. Compulsory education and social insurance systems, or universal declarations of human rights are examples of this. However, in order to be included in a function system, individuals have to meet system-specific requirements and be relevant to and addressable by that system; they must also be included in the communication of a system. There are two forms of inclusion in a system: as a layperson (e.g. patients in the health system, students in the education system or consumers in the economic system), or in a performance role (e.g. doctors, teachers or employees). Inclusion in a performance role requires a higher level of skill and education; optimum life opportunities require at least one inclusion in a performance role. Exclusion from function systems (such as arts or sports) is not in itself a social problem; however, some social problems can be described as consequences of exclusion. In particular, subsequent exclusion processes can potentially worsen quality of life. For instance, those who leave the education system without qualifications have fewer chances of finding regular paid employment, unemployment then leads to worse housing options, and so on. In his later work, Luhmann (1997) stressed the possibility of an emerging function system that addresses the exclusion problems of functional differentiation (p. 633). Considering this ‘possibility’, Bommes and Scherr (2012) analysed social

100

S. Bundschuh et al.

work in modern welfare states as a system of organised support. They describe the functions of social work as exclusion prevention (e.g. for children who experience problems at school and who are at risk of exclusion from the education system), inclusion mediation (e.g. for former drug addicts looking for new jobs and new skills) and exclusion administration (e.g. low-threshold facilities for homeless people). Schirmer and Michailakis (2015) refer to this approach as ‘exclusion management’. The welfare state, social services and social work practice share a common goal: the inclusion of all groups which are at a higher risk of exclusion. In contrast to Luhmann, Kronauer (2010) stresses that exclusion in neoliberal capitalism is not total—at least in European countries with their semantic of inclusion. Even the long-term unemployed and other excluded groups are included in some kind of social security system, in the legal system or as consumers in the economic system, albeit with a limited budget. Exclusion and inclusion are not two sides of the same coin but seem to coexist simultaneously and should be considered as a continuum. Kronauer (2010) describes the simultaneousness of in and out as a specific form of social exclusion in modern societies (p. 145). For Kronauer, exclusion from the labour market is the most important dimension of social exclusion; in modern capitalist societies, other dimensions of exclusion are connected with an individual’s social position in the labour market. Employment problems range from marginalisation and precarious jobs, and long- or short-term unemployment, to total exclusion from the labour market and sanctions by the job centre. Continued exclusion from the labour market may result in reduced social relationships, social isolation, diminished participation in life opportunities and a significant decline in living standards. These dimensions of exclusion tend to reinforce each other and, in the end, may lead to individuals becoming trapped in the welfare system: an institutionalised form of the simultaneousness of in and out (Kronauer, 2010). The first government report on poverty and wealth in Germany was published in 2001; released in 2017, the latest (fifth) report shows a clear increase in poverty risk rates over the past 20 years (Bundesregierung, 2017a). Quantitative poverty research methodology has improved during this period, and more specific concepts have been developed; these not only include income-based data but also data on material deprivation. New research concepts in relation to social exclusion analyse the intersection of different variables, such as race, gender, class and body (Winker & Degele, 2010, p. 52), rather than focusing on isolated indicators, such as education or income. The spatial segregation and concentration of socio-economic or ethnic population groups in specific urban districts or suburbs is another form of social exclusion. Poor and stigmatised neighbourhoods with insufficient community facilities can be described as a distinct form of spatial exclusion. Having defined social exclusion and inclusion primarily in relation to class and labour, the following sections analyse the debate on inclusion processes in relation to body with a focus on disabilities, and with regard to race and migration. The term inclusion is discussed as a new concept in relation to integration.

5  Social Work and Inclusive Society in Germany

101

5.1.3  Inclusion in the Context of Disability In the nineteenth century, people with disabilities were excluded from society in Germany; they were often marginalised, confined within the family home and kept away from the rest of society with no access to education. By the late 1800s, religious organisations began to establish institutions in which people with disabilities lived separately from wider society. The basic paradigm at that time was care and benevolence. During the reign of National Socialism in Germany, from 1933 to 1945, people with disabilities lost all their rights and many were tortured and abused in medical experiments; 200,000 people with disabilities were killed in concentration camps and institutions (Aly, 2013). After 1945, the paradigm of care and benevolence resumed and most people with intellectual and/or physical disabilities were cared for in large institutions. The establishment of the special education system at that time was a historic achievement as children with disabilities, particularly intellectual disabilities, had previously had no right to education. It was largely due to parent and advocacy organisations that this right to education was established. Segregation in the form of special schools was widely accepted as the guiding principle. The concept of integration was developed in the late 1970s and early 1980s. This period was shaped by attempts at reform based on the principles of normalisation (people with disabilities should be able to live normal lives, just like those without disabilities), deinstitutionalisation, empowerment and demands for self-­ determination by people with disabilities (Frühauf, 2012). The principle of normalisation was extended to people with mental illnesses and led to the closure of large psychiatric hospitals for those with mental and intellectual impairments (Ahrbeck, 2014, p. 37). In general, the normalisation movement led to an increase in quality of life for people with disabilities. Once again, it was largely parent organisations (such as Lebenshilfe in Germany) that were responsible for bringing about these changes and demanding alternative, more extensive opportunities for their children beyond what was possible within the special education system (Frühauf, 2012, pp.  14–16). In 1973, the educational commission of the Federal Assembly (Bundesrat) took up the momentum from advocacy groups and universities and demanded the establishment of integrative education for children with and without disabilities (Jantzen, 1998, p.  18); however, this had a limited impact on educational policy. Prior to the ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN CRPD) in 2009, Germany introduced several significant laws which aimed to end discrimination against people with disabilities and facilitate self-determination and participation. When a law dedicated to people with disabilities within general social law (Sozialgesetzbuch IX, 2016) came into effect, the paradigm shift from care to right of participation was legally enshrined. The right to options and choices (Wunsch- und Wahlrechte) for people with disabilities was strengthened, and the principle that outpatient treatment should take

102

S. Bundschuh et al.

precedence over inpatient treatment (ambulant vor stationär) was legally mandated (Beauftragter der Bundesregierung für die Belange behinderter Menschen, 2017). Other milestones in terms of establishing equality for people with disabilities are the 2002 Disability Equality Act (Behindertengleichstellungsgesetz [BGG], 2002) and the 2006 General Equal Treatment Act (Allgemeines Gleichbehandlungsgesetz [AGG], 2006). The AGG guarantees that people with disabilities receive special protection in relation to employment, occupations and contracts under private law. Finally, people with disabilities have the right to make claims for damages and compensation for discrimination experienced in education and at work; this can be claimed according to the degree of disability, which has to be officially determined (Beauftragter der Bundesregierung für die Belange behinderter Menschen, 2017). Germany’s ratification of the UN CRPD in 2009 heightened the debate surrounding the appropriateness of separate and integrative settings. Referring to the UN CRPD, some called for the dissolution of all special settings, such as schools and workshops for people with disabilities (Werkstatt für behinderte Menschen [WfbM]). The view that inclusion is entirely separate from integration is considered a more radical approach. Others, however, interpret the UN CRPD in a way that strongly favours heterogeneous settings and common experiences for children with and without disabilities but still allows for special settings, similar to the concept of the least restrictive environment in the USA. According to this concept, a continuum of placement options should be available, depending on an individual’s needs.

5.1.4  Inclusion in the Context of Migration In the discourse on migration, the term inclusion is used in contrast to and as a critique of the term integration. In relation to migration, the conventional term integration refers to different people living together in a society made up of a local population along with migrants and their descendants (see Schulte & Treichler’s nuanced reconstruction of the concept of integration [2010, pp. 43–73]). Integration means the incorporation of a person who comes from outside, into a social group which is mainly imagined as a homogeneous linguistic and cultural totality. This assumption implies that individuals who are seen as other, foreign or strange have a duty to integrate. Such an approach only emphasises the existing totality and does not enable a transformation into a new social form. Accordingly, this means that newcomers are required to assimilate (Schweitzer, 2016, pp. 1294–1299). In Germany, there has been debate amongst politicians and social scientists on whether the term integration is appropriate to describe the processes of autochthonous and allochthonous populations living together. Since 2001, Germany has been defined as a country of immigration with different social, cultural and political values and lifestyles (Foroutan, 2019, p. 224 f.). Societal normality is characterised by migration processes. Some even define Germany as a migrant or post-migrant society (Foroutan, 2015, 2018, 2019). The term post-migrant indicates the normality of people with diverse ethnic, cultural and national backgrounds in society. The

5  Social Work and Inclusive Society in Germany

103

post-migrant perspective includes an understanding of society as plural (Foroutan, 2018, p. 25; 2019, pp. 27–36 and pp. 216–219). Strongly conservative forces work against this plurality and call for a dominant culture (Leitkultur), implying that a homogeneous majority culture should be a guideline for all people living in Germany. Such a Leitkultur represents a native majority in Germany whose socialisation is based on Christianity and oriented towards Western Europe. However, this demand for a dominant cultural guideline challenges the current acceptance of the status of minorities and hybridity. Moreover, it symbolises a wish to establish an authoritarian democracy of the majority and implies a restriction of the rights of minorities to participate in debates on common values and lifestyles. The political controversy within the German government regarding refugee and asylum policy has accelerated tendencies towards exclusion and strengthened right-wing populism (Zick, Küpper, & Berghan, 2019). A deliberative democracy which protects the interests of minorities would be an emancipatory alternative. A democratic society requires common ground for coexistence. The philosopher Jürgen Habermas (2017) rejects the concept of a dominant culture but emphasises the principles of the constitution as common ground for the political culture of a country. However, political culture has to be discussed by all those who share a social environment over a longer period of time. The precept that established communities have more rights than newcomers, or even their descendants, is dysfunctional in a (post-)migrant society (see Elias & Scotson’s critical study, 1965/2009). Distancing themselves from the politically restrictive connotations of the term integration, critical voices in the migration debate adopted the term inclusion as a less politically charged expression for a contemporary, non-repressive understanding of social community life. In discourse on migration, the terms inclusion and exclusion have acquired both an analytical and normative relevance (Schirilla, 2017, p. 155). In an analytical sense, inclusion means the possibility of being a part of different social systems or national states. It allows an individual to be considered in terms of belonging to multiple fields of society or different sectors in the same field, such as nation or ethnicity (Nemesh-Baier, 2014). In a normative sense, inclusion generally means that all people should have equal access to the economic, social, cultural and symbolic resources of the society they live in (Schirilla, 2017, p. 156). The term inclusion is connected to a further significant advance: the underlying cultural model of disability. This raises questions about all structural standards which potentially cause discrimination and form barriers to participation (Dannenbeck, 2016, p.  481). There is more of a focus on analysing the societal structures of difference with regard to the risks of exclusion and discrimination than on the integration of a specific group (Dannenbeck, 2016, p. 486). Following this approach, it is also helpful to explore overlapping forms of discrimination in more detail, as defined in the concept of intersectionality. Intersectionality combines the critical analysis of different forms of discrimination, for example in the fields of migration and disabilities (see Wansing & Westphal, 2014). In inclusive politics and

104

S. Bundschuh et al.

social work, all dimensions of social heterogeneity and discrimination need to be considered (Muche, 2016, p. 1335).

5.2  P  ractising Inclusion: Different Life Situations and the Role of Social Work The scientific and political analyses, and the discourses described above, are connected to specific practices in the field of social work. Social work could be characterised as a societal institution with the specific task of raising awareness and caring for marginalised individuals, groups and communities. This chapter addresses the life circumstances of four marginalised groups: older substance users, homeless young people, students with special needs and people with a migrant background. Social workers mediate between their clients’ needs, the requirements of the social work profession, legal regulations and administrative stipulations. The methods applied range from case management to structural empowerment. Social workers assume a central role in the implementation of the inclusion paradigm: facilitating inclusion, and avoiding and managing exclusion (Bommes & Scherr, 2012). Social work is also considered as a ‘human rights profession’ (Staub-­ Bernasconi, 2008), and social workers are actively involved in all areas addressed in the UN CRPD.  They work in early childhood education, in schools, non-formal educational settings, adult education, workshops for people with disabilities (WfbM), with the elderly and people with dementia as well as in outpatient and inpatient psychiatric settings. In all of these contexts, the issue of inclusion is ever present. Social services often have two goal perspectives: one aims at the improvement of individual life quality, the other at the inclusion in society. Achieving a balance between those two goal perspectives is not free of contradictions for social workers. While it is necessary to demand wide-ranging support systems to improve individual life quality and participation opportunities (social advocacy), this is limited by available public funds/resources. From this perspective, the paradigm of inclusion can only be implemented if professionals are knowledgeable about appropriate accommodations that their clients need. This requires close networking activities between social workers, clients, advocacy groups, service providers and others in the fields of social work. Solutions need to be based on an individual’s preferences, strengths and needs (assessment) and empirical evidence of best practice. The role of social work in different inclusion processes will be described in more detail in the following sections. First, we will outline the situations of homeless young people and older substance users and describe opportunities for supporting inclusion through specialised case management. We will then examine inclusion processes in the field of education, based on the example of students with special needs. Finally, we will discuss the situation of people with a migrant background in

5  Social Work and Inclusive Society in Germany

105

Germany and the ambiguous role of social work in this field—between the poles of stigmatisation and inclusion.

5.2.1  L  ife Orientation and Inclusion of Homeless Young People Despite a rise in the number of young people sleeping rough or in precarious housing in Germany in recent years, there is insufficient research regarding the impact on health and risk behaviour, susceptibility to disease and mortality. The results of the model project Gateway management in organisations working with the homeless in the Koblenz region (Schnittstellenmanagement in der Wohnungslosenhilfe in der Region Koblenz) illustrate the psychosocial and health problems affecting homeless young people, in particular young women. The project report shows that the salutogenesis model described by Antonovsky (1997) can be applied to this target group to improve compliance and motivate individuals to accept further professional assistance. The project ran from December 2014 to June 2017 (for further information, see Frietsch & Holbach, 2017). One key aspect of homelessness amongst young people is the close interconnection between homelessness and additional problem situations; these have often been systematically solidified in the context of challenging and unresolved psychological and social development processes and critical life events. Recent studies (Frietsch & Holbach, 2017; Gerull & Merckens, 2012) confirm the interaction of different— generally serious—problem situations in a mutual dynamic, which symptomatically manifests as homelessness. For example, serious family issues and crises lead to stressful relationship conflicts. Unfolding problem situations often lead to disruptions at school, training or work. The following health and psychosocial constraints have particularly a negative impact: addiction problems, mental/behavioural disorders or psychiatric disease patterns, as well as consequential issues, such as excessive debt and legal problems. In the past, the homeless scene was dominated by men and male-specific life situations. However, for over a decade, the number of homeless women has been continually increasing, with homelessness assistance services documenting a 25% female quota (Bundesarbeitsgemeinschaft Wohnungslosenhilfe, 2017). In terms of research and practice, expert discourse on gender-sensitive assistance is at an embryonic stage. In order to focus on the psychosocial life situations, such as traumatic events, which specifically affect women in the context of homelessness, a gender-differentiated approach is required with regard to these serious and complex problems. Awareness and differentiation impact on both structural and methodological assistance for homeless people. There is empirical evidence that women are more often the victims of gender-based violence. Furthermore, as they have often been socialised to internalise such experiences, these women need gender-specific assistance and treatment strategies.

106

S. Bundschuh et al.

The life conditions of homeless people are stressful in all respects (e.g. experience of violence, exposure to weather conditions, malnutrition and inadequate hygiene) and have a negative impact on the health and psychosocial condition of an individual. With regard to the number of mental disorders, most psychiatric studies refer to single homeless men. Very few empirically sound results are available relating to homeless women (Heise & Krägeloh, 2010). However, all these studies found that, compared with the general population, a higher percentage of the homeless women and men were significantly affected by mental disorders and illnesses, as well as addiction (see Fig.  5.1). The available assistance and care structures for homeless women require improvement, both in terms of structure and methods. There is a particular need for further development in supporting compliance for homeless young women in terms of the provision and acceptance of assistance. The results of a survey on life orientation using the questionnaire SOC-29 (Sense of Coherence Scale) provide evidence of the increased vulnerability of homeless young people compared with those without housing issues. For homeless young women and men, the SOC average is 110 and is significantly lower than the average for comparable groups of young people without housing issues (146). The salutogenesis model described by Antonovsky is based on the assumption that individual

Fig. 5.1  Symptomatic homelessness amongst under-25s (Frietsch & Holbach, 2016, p. 22)

5  Social Work and Inclusive Society in Germany

107

experiences are shaped by the social environment and that consequently, an individual’s sense of coherence and psychosocial health are a result of social structures and the psychosocial situation experienced by that individual. Thus, the salutogenesis model provides a theory-based foundation for problem-solving and promoting psychosocial health; in addition, it strengthens individual and social resources. On this basis, model training programmes have been developed (Franke & Witte, 2009; Kaluza, 2011); such programmes apply this method in a new counselling setting specifically for homeless young women with serious problems. It is essential that these training programmes are conveyed to experts in homelessness assistance in an application-oriented way; this ensures that additional assistance for homeless people can be established, particularly female-specific counselling. Due to complexity and severity of the problems affecting homeless young people, a compatible case management concept can be applied to ensure effective and efficient procedures, and to cope with interface issues for different assistance systems (e.g. addiction support, debt counselling and psychiatry). Establishing more transparency and sustainability for target-oriented methodical action is both a technical and a practice-based issue for the social workers and cooperation partners who provide support services. The aim of a case management concept is to develop binding support structures, which also incorporate a legal support system, in particular by synchronising relevant assistance in different areas of social legislation. Case management structures enable homeless young people (under the age of 25) to be provided with material and immaterial support from one source. Homeless young people can absolutely not be described as a homogeneous group. One essential aspect to explain homelessness of young people is the close interconnection of housing issues with additional problematic situations. Based on the findings of the model project (Frietsch & Holbach, 2016), the illustration above shows the multiple factors that affect the dynamic of homelessness amongst women and men under the age of 25. Critical life events, such as family conflicts (F: 95%, M: 83%) and problematic substance use (e.g. drug use F: 77%, M: 82%) have particularly serious impacts and lead to health-related restrictions. Hence, professional offers should be based on cooperative assistance according to the case management principles and follow the salutogenesis model to ensure a sustainable impact.

5.2.2  Exclusion and Inclusion of Older Heroin Users In Germany, one group of substance users often experiences stigmatisation and social exclusion: heroin users over the age of 45. Some of these users are undergoing methadone maintenance treatment or other substitution treatments, whereas others are active users. Although a third of heroin users in Germany are aged 45 or over, little attention has been paid to this age group. Long-term drug use is frequently accompanied by detrimental life circumstances, such as homelessness, unemployment or imprisonment, which can lead to the early onset of impairments and diseases typically related to old age, such as limited mobility; this often results in care

108

S. Bundschuh et al.

needs (Reece, 2007; Reece & Hulse, 2013; Vogt, 2009, 2011). Individuals who use drugs such as heroin are now living longer; the availability of substitution treatments and well-established medical and psychological support for drug users are key reasons for this extended life expectancy. The number of older drug users with age-related diseases requiring care services will increase substantially in the next few years. For this reason, in addition to psychosocial counselling, the social work sector is now focusing attention on projects and research that address the physical conditions and care needs of drug users. There is also an emphasis on linking services provided through inpatient and outpatient care facilities. It is difficult to accommodate drug users with care needs in regular nursing homes due to the complex requirements relating to substance use, methadone maintenance or other substitution treatments. There are model projects with specialised facilities for ageing drug users, as well as projects focused on linking elderly drug users with regular facilities for the elderly in Germany. The inclusion of substance users with care needs will continue to be an issue in the social work sector and other related fields. The following research project, funded by the Federal Ministry of Research and Education, addressed these issues by analysing the psychosocial and care situation of older heroin users (Schmid et al., 2016). It was realised between 2014 and 2017 and focused on a case management approach, a well-established social service intervention with evidence-based effects on linking and combining multiple services. The project team adapted the case management model to older substance users and evaluated the practical implementation, as well as the advantages and disadvantages of the intervention. The research design combines a quantitative survey of service users using standardised instruments and qualitative interviews with experts in the field. Between February 2016 and May 2017, a total of 62 men and women were included in the quantitative pre–post study; they were interviewed at the beginning of the intervention and after 6 months of treatment with case management. The inclusion criteria for the study were that the male and female participants were aged 45 or above and were active opioid users and/or receiving methadone maintenance treatment or other substitution treatments (Table 5.1). Only a small number of the participants in the study have a regular income and most live on welfare payments. Although the mean age of the sample is 51.7 years, a third of the participants already receive age-related welfare payments. The data on illnesses and disabilities show that the study participants are more frequently affected by such health problems than this age group in the general population. The effectiveness of implementing this approach in a practical social work context can be analysed with a focus on case management intervention. For the purpose of this research, case management is defined as a person-centred structured model with the following phases: intake, assessment, target agreement, service planning, linking, monitoring/re-assessment, termination and evaluation. In most cases, it was possible to successfully initiate case management. The phases up to the service planning (intake, assessment, target agreement and service planning) were realised in more than 50% of cases. Two-thirds of all cases in the sample were successful, including some cases which were only partially realised.

5  Social Work and Inclusive Society in Germany

109

Table 5.1  Description of study participants

Mean age (standard deviation) Housing situation: Living alone Income sources:  Welfare payments  Pension  Wages Hepatitis-C infection HIV infection Medical problems in the last 30 days:  Depression  Anxiety  Dental problems  Respiratory disease/chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Male (49) 51.4 (5.4) 81.6%

Female (13) 52.9 (4.7) 69.2%

Total (62) 51.7 (5.2) 79.0%

71.5% 16.3% 8.2% 83.7% 10.2%

84.6% 15.4% 0.0% 61.5% 15.4%

74.2% 16.1% 6.5% 79.0% 11.3%

44.9% 40.8% 38.8% 18.4%

46.2% 38.5% 30.8% 53.8%

45.2% 40.3% 37.1% 25.8%

Considering the progress achieved with regard to the case management phase model and the quality of the work in this intervention, it is evident that in two-thirds of cases (67.7%), structured case management processes were initiated successfully (n  =  42 out of n  =  62). This demonstrates that it is possible for a social worker trained in case management to initiate and follow structured counselling processes with older substance users. The success of implementation differs according to the setting; for example, implementation was easier in the contexts of assisted housing (73.9%) or psychosocial counselling (71%). In contrast, in low-threshold settings, only three out of eight participants (37.5%) were successfully included in case management processes. In this study, the development of clients’ life quality over the intervention period was investigated and analysed using standardised instruments. A medical history tool developed in 2010 (KDS-Kat) was used for follow-up; it consists of 13 questions and elicits information about satisfaction with various aspects of life, such as work, relationships (with partners, friends and relatives) and financial and housing situation, as well as other important indicators relating to inclusion, exclusion and participation. The HEALTH-49 questionnaire was also used; it consists of 49 questions about an individual’s physical and psychosocial status. It also includes two general questions about the impact of physical and mental impairment during the last 30 days. Both questionnaires were used prior to treatment through case management. After a six-month intervention period, the questionnaires were used again. This made it possible to analyse and compare the data collected before and after treatment. Regarding satisfaction with life, results from the KDS-Kat questionnaire showed that the highest improvements over the six-month period could be observed in relation to ‘relationships with parents/siblings/relatives’, ‘relationships with their

110

S. Bundschuh et al.

children’, ‘substance use’ and ‘legal problems’; the first and the last categories are statistically significant. Analysis of responses relating to perceived physical and mental impairment in the 30 days before and after treatment with case management shows a significant improvement concerning mental health. The HEALTH-49 results show slight improvements regarding ‘depression’, ‘phobic anxieties’, ‘mental and somatic impairments’, ‘mental well-being’, ‘difficulties in interaction’, ‘activity and participation’ and ‘social impairment’. Further analysis reveals that two-thirds of the participants (67.7%) who successfully took part in structured case management processes showed greater improvements than the group of clients who were unable to engage in these processes. Schmid (2013) refers to the exclusion criteria analysed in The German project of heroin assisted treatment of opiate dependent patients between 2005 and 2008. On examining the data collected in this study in relation to the criteria in the above research, it is clear that older substance users are affected by several exclusion factors. The data in Table  5.2 show the significant impact of exclusion factors on the individuals in this study. Overall, the results of the study show some small improvements in quality of life; those participants who successfully took part in intervention experienced greater improvements. It is likely that older heroin users have tried a lot to improve their life situation over the years and that they have, at some point, accepted their situation. Taking small steps in middle age or later life should therefore be seen as a significant achievement. For these long-term substance users, greater changes can be considered ambitious goals; even maintaining certain standards and achieving a certain level of stability, for example regarding substitution treatment, substance use or housing, can already be considered a great success. It is essential that social workers support older substance users by motivating and encouraging them. The case management approach can be a useful intervention when working with older substance users, in particular due to the linking phase; helping clients to connect with suitable services can improve their psychosocial and health situation and increase their degree of participation. Following this idea, case managers, and social workers in general, can be seen as agents of inclusion; they can help older substance users to get the support they need by linking them with suitable facilities or service providers. Table 5.2  Exclusion factors affecting older substance users (n = 62) 9 31 58 45 44 8 21

Percentage (%) 14.5 50 92.1 72.6 71 12.9 32.8

28

45.2

n No secondary-level qualifications No vocational qualifications No employment Financial debts Not in a relationship Precarious housing situation Lack of close relationships/functioning social networks Unsatisfying leisure time

5  Social Work and Inclusive Society in Germany

111

5.2.3  Inclusive Education and Disability 5.2.3.1  General Empirical Data Recent data from the Standing Conference of the Ministers of Education and Cultural Affairs (Sekretariat der Ständigen Konferenz der Kultusminister der Länder in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland [KMK]), which is responsible for school policy at a national level, revealed that 523,800 students with special needs are currently learning in the German education system (2018). During the period from 2007 to 2016, in which Germany signed and ratified the UN CRPD, the percentage of students with special needs increased from 5.8% to 7% (KMK, 2018). In addition, the percentage of students with special needs in mainstream education more than doubled from 17.5% to 39.3% (KMK, 2018). In the 2017–2018 school year, 42.5% of students with disabilities attended mainstream schools and 57.5% attended special schools (KMK, 2019). The number of special schools has decreased in recent years; in 2005, there were 3468 special schools, whereas by 2017, this number had fallen to 2865 (in comparison to 32,995 mainstream schools) (Statista, 2019). However, since 2007, there has been no change in the percentage of students in special schools in relation to the total number of school-age students; the current figure is 4.2% (KMK, 2018). For proponents of a radical view of inclusion, there is still a long way to go. More moderate supporters of inclusion point out the advantages of special settings, such as the very small classes and the low student-teacher ratios. KMK statistics show that in special schools, there are an average of 10 students per class and the student-­ teacher ratio is 5.3:1 (2016). In mainstream schools, the average class size ranges from 21 to 26 students, depending on the type of school, and the student-teacher ratio is between 11.4:1 and 16.3:1. In general, inclusive settings are more common at preschool level (0–6 years) than in primary or secondary educational settings. Sixty-seven percent of preschool children who receive integration support or have special educational needs are educated in settings where they are in the minority (Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung, 2014, p. 169). Most older children receiving special education services attend special schools, although the number of children with special needs in mainstream schools nearly doubled between 2000–2001 and 2012–2013 (Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung, 2014, p.  178). While many German Länder have committed to reducing the number of students in special schools, there has in fact been an increase in both the number of students attending special schools and those with special needs attending mainstream schools (Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung, 2014, p. 179). People with disabilities have limited access to the employment market, and the rate of unemployment for people who are certified as severely disabled (schwerbehindert) is currently 12%, which is more than double the rate for those without disabilities. While the overall unemployment rate has fallen in Germany due to the country’s strong economy, the rate for people with severe disabilities has increased.

112

S. Bundschuh et al.

This is partially due to demographic changes, such as an increase in the number of older people with severe disabilities (Bundesagentur für Arbeit, 2019), but it is also evidence of the structural discrimination faced by people with disabilities in the labour market. In addition to jobs in the primary labour market (private and public sector), special settings, such as sheltered workshops for people with disabilities (WfbM), also offer employment opportunities to those who are unable to find jobs. By the end of 2017, there were 311,164 people with disabilities working in sheltered workshops or attending day programmes (for people with disabilities who cannot achieve the minimum productivity requirements in a workshop). The German social welfare system provides 4.6 billion euros of funding for sheltered workshops (Bundesarbeitsgemeinschaft der überörtlichen Träger & con_sens, 2019). The 2013 micro-census revealed that the employment rate (number of employed people in a specific population group in percent) for people with disabilities was 41.9%, significantly lower than for people without disabilities (77.4%). Such discrepancies may also be due to the lower educational and professional qualifications of people with disabilities. Almost 28% of people with disabilities aged between 30 and 45 did not have a professional qualification (compared with 13.5% of people without disabilities). The situation regarding school attainment is similar: people with disabilities are twice as likely to leave school without a qualification (6.6%) as those without disabilities (3.2%) (Bundesagentur für Arbeit, 2019; Pfaff, 2012). Statistics show that children with special needs make up 44% of all fourth grade students; however, by ninth grade, this has dropped to only 17% (Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung, 2018). Limited empirical data are available on the participation of children and young people with disabilities in informal, state-financed child and youth services (e.g. cultural and sports activities). A survey amongst the management of youth service organisations conducted in 2011 by the DJI (Deutsches Jugendinstitut) revealed that at least one young person with a diagnosed disability attended activities in half of the organisations surveyed. In most cases, these young participants had a learning disability. Twenty-five percent of the organisations reported that children with intellectual/cognitive disabilities attended. Attendance at recreational, creative and sports activities was lower than at community-based youth centres (Seckinger, Pluto, Peucker, & van Santen, 2016). The number of young people and children who participate in more specialised activities, such as the National Paralympic Youth Germany (Deutsche Behindertensportjugend), has increased significantly since 2000–2001 (Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung, 2014, p.  180). Unfortunately, no systematic data are available. The following studies relate to students with visual impairments and blindness; they illustrate some of the challenges experienced in inclusive classrooms when neither the teachers nor children have had sufficient preparation for the inclusion of students with special needs.

5  Social Work and Inclusive Society in Germany

113

5.2.3.2  Inclusion of Children with Visual Impairments and Blindness An increasing number of students with special educational needs are taught in mainstream educational settings. This is also true for students with blindness or low vision (KMK, 2014, 2016). In the 2000–2001 school year, only 12.4% of students with special needs were educated in inclusive mainstream settings; by 2015–2016, this figure had risen to 37.7%. Over this period, the number of students with blindness/low vision in inclusive settings increased from 24.5% to 42.5%. A study by the Paedagogical University Heidelberg and Humboldt University of Berlin examined the conditions required to ensure successful inclusion (see Högner, 2017; Lang & Heyl, 2013). The method consisted of comparing individual case studies. The basis for this research was the observation that students who transferred from a special education setting to a mainstream school frequently moved back to the special school within a year. The goal of this research was to examine the reasons why students returned to special schools. Sixteen individual case studies were conducted involving students aged nine to 20 with blindness or low vision. Methodologically, one student from a mainstream school was compared with a student who moved back from mainstream education to a special school. In each case, the following aspects were assessed: the reasons for the change, the student’s social and learning behaviour, the school and classroom climate, challenging academic subjects, the role of social integration, available resources (including assistive technology) and the involvement and engagement of teachers and parents. Students, teachers and parents identified the following reasons for moving from mainstream to special schools: lack of social integration in the classroom, lack of attention to issues related to visual impairments (classroom/ environmental accommodation and assistive technology) and the character of the individual student (e.g. lack of self-esteem, slow working/learning speed and level of support needed). In mainstream schools, a significantly higher level of support is required by visually impaired students and their teachers than in special schools which focus on visual impairments. In mainstream schools, students with visual impairments rated subjects such as mathematics, chemistry, physical education, geography, physics, biology and art as difficult. They experienced problems learning LaTeX (a special mathematics script for the blind) and participating in science experiments; furthermore, there was a lack of tactile materials to represent graphic content (e.g. when discussing curves in a maths lesson). With regard to the school climate, students rated aspects such as ‘stimulation and diversity’ and ‘focus on achievement’ as high in mainstream schools and low in special schools. The classroom climate was rated positively in special schools in terms of the ‘learning community’ and being ‘student centred’. On the other hand, in special schools, students experienced significant problems in relation to ‘independence and diligence in learning’, ‘concentration’ and ‘perseverance and stamina’, as well as in terms of social behaviour relating to ‘self-perception’ and ‘empathy/sensitivity to others’ (Högner, 2017; Lang & Heyl, 2013). The results show that in inclusive education, professionalism, material/environmental resources and time are essential

114

S. Bundschuh et al.

components. At the same time, an individual student’s character and social integration are also significant factors for successful inclusion. Mainstream schools face many challenges accommodating blind and visually impaired students; these include a lack of time, insufficient professional resources, a lack of assistive technology and insufficient specific knowledge about the needs of individual students, as well as difficulties adapting lesson materials. As a result, students with visual impairments need to develop specific skills and coping mechanisms in a mainstream classroom environment. In order to meet the higher achievement expectations in mainstream schools (in comparison to special schools), students with visual impairments require attributes such as independence, diligence, endurance and a greater level of motivation to learn and succeed. The following elements were identified as key to optimising inclusive education for students with blindness or visual impairments in mainstream schools: improving teaching and organisational frameworks, building students’ social competencies and independence from an early age, and supporting students’ potential capabilities (Högner, 2017). A further study examined the learning conditions for blind and visually impaired students in mainstream classrooms from the teachers’ perspective (Högner, Arndt, & Kober, 2017). An online questionnaire was completed by 30 inclusive schools in Berlin which have students with significant visual impairments or blindness. The questionnaire assessed the following aspects of implementing inclusive education: environmental and material resources, inclusion-oriented measurements during lessons, support for teachers and activities that aid the successful implementation of inclusion. The questionnaire was completed by 34% of the 89 inclusive schools in Berlin. The results show that, in terms of instructional aids, only simple, easy-to-­ implement environmental accommodation was used. This included adapting viewing conditions at a student’s desk and in the classroom, or the use of magnification and large print. However, tactile media and electronic aids were not used. It is evident that disadvantages resulting from students’ disabilities are rarely accommodated for (e.g. the need for more time to complete tasks); this was only possible in 6% of cases. Only 44% of schools had access to a specially trained educator with a focus on visual impairments. In most cases, schools cooperate with the parents, but not with agencies or professionals. Only 59% of respondents reported that there were exchanges with other special educators. Furthermore, schools reported insufficient access to continuing education; only 31% of the staff have access to relevant further training. The questionnaire gave teachers an opportunity to express their wishes and criticisms in relation to the implementation of inclusion in their schools. Teachers expressed a wish for more time to deal with a range of tasks, such as preparing and evaluating lessons, teaching content, additional work related to inclusion, developing individual educational plans and team work related to individual children. They also asked for greater professional support during lessons, as well as for more special education and inclusion support. Teachers emphasised the need for inclusion

5  Social Work and Inclusive Society in Germany

115

assistants to be assigned to a specific child and that such assistants should not be required to work with other students at random. Teachers also highlighted the need for better preparation for teaching blind and visually impaired students in mainstream classrooms, for example through the provision of informative booklets and hand-outs or through continuing education programmes. One teacher wrote, ‘Prior to having a visually impaired child in my class for the first time, I was very insecure about whether I was doing everything right and, for example, preventing harm to the child’s sight capacity. Over time, I learnt to assess the danger of a situation and I can now be more relaxed when teaching the child. An intensive continuing education programme before the child joined my class would have been very helpful’ (Högner, Arndt, & Kober, 2017, author’s own translation). Other teachers felt that they ‘were left alone with the child at the beginning’ (Högner, Arndt, & Kober, 2017, author’s own translation). In addition, teachers emphasised that the opportunity to collaborate with specialists prior to the arrival of a child with special needs would improve this situation in terms of providing up-to-date teaching content and more appropriate learning materials, reducing bureaucracy and increasing financial support (e.g. for purchasing adapted learning media). This was seen as important in order to avoid the need to ‘beg for money for essential instructional aids’ (Högner, Arndt, & Kober, 2017, author’s own translation). The findings show that in order to provide optimal conditions for students with visual impairments in mainstream schools, it is vital that educational settings are developed and adapted before students join a class. Students with visual impairments should not be placed in such settings to fulfil an inclusion quota without first establishing appropriate learning and teaching conditions. One teacher summarised the current situation as follows: ‘Inclusion is a rewarding change, but it also involves very labour-intensive changes to teaching methods. Inclusion is impossible under the current professional and financial conditions. Simply giving teachers and students a greater work load without offering more time, and more financial and professional support is not going to work’ (Högner, Arndt, & Kober, 2017, author’s own translation).

5.2.4  Processes of Inclusion in a (Post-)Migrant Society The Federal Statistical Office (Statistisches Bundesamt [Destatis]) works with the concept of people with a migrant background (Migrationshintergrund); this refers to citizens who were not born with German citizenship or who have at least one parent who was not born with German citizenship. This concept encompasses immigrants, foreigners who were born in Germany, naturalised citizens who migrated to or were born in Germany, repatriated ethnic Germans and German-born descendants of these groups (Destatis, 2019a). In 2017, people with a migrant background made up 23.6% of the population in Germany—19.3 million people. Around 9.4 million of them were non-German

116

S. Bundschuh et al.

citizens, and 9.8 million were German citizens with a migrant background (Destatis, 2019b). In Germany, there are several differences in terms of life circumstances (e.g. working and living conditions, salary and health status) between people with a migrant background and the general population. There are also many differences within national groups, which are relatively heterogeneous. After World War II, immigration to West Germany (Federal Republic of Germany [FRG]) was dominated by labour recruitment in the 1950s and 1960s and by family reunifications in the 1970s and early 1980s. Most migrants came from Mediterranean countries, such as Italy, Spain, Greece, Morocco and Turkey, and the majority migrated to West Germany on the basis of labour recruitment agreements. At present, there are 5.9 million people living in Germany with origins in these countries. They account for the largest group of residents with a migrant background (Brückner, 2016, p. 222 f.; Hoffmann & Romeu Gordo, 2016, p. 67). From the 1960s onwards, there was labour migration to the former East Germany (German Democratic Republic [GDR]) from other socialist countries, such as Poland, Hungary, Cuba, Mozambique and Vietnam. Alongside students from other socialist states, political refugees and asylum seekers, these contract workers were the largest group of immigrants; in 1989, around 95,000 such workers were registered with the East German authorities (Bade & Oltmer, 2004; Poutrus, 2015). Concurrently, from the 1950s onwards, ethnic Germans and their families migrated to West Germany from Central and Eastern Europe, as well as from the former Soviet Union. In the early 1990s, immigration from this group reached its peak; by 2012, the number had declined to about 1800 new migrants. More recently, there has been a slight increase to around 7100 people in 2018. Overall, more than four million repatriated ethnic Germans and their descendants are currently living in Germany (Brückner, 2016, 221  f.; Bundesverwaltungsamt, 2019; Hoffmann & Romeu Gordo, 2016, p. 67). In addition to these two major groups, other groups with migrant backgrounds come from other European Union countries (2.6 million) and from non-EU countries (third countries) (3.7 million). Since the beginning of the twenty-first century, there has been a notable increase in net migration to Germany; these are primarily migrants from Eastern and Southern Europe, as well as refugees (Brückner, 2016, p. 222; Hoffmann & Romeu Gordo, 2016, p. 68). The suspension of labour recruitment in 1973 led to changes in the statistical composition of new immigrants; refugees were becoming one of the main migrant groups. In the 1990s, the number of refugees increased with many migrants from Balkan States seeking refuge due to the civil war in the region (Brückner, 2016, p. 223). More recently, the number of refugees rose again; there were 442,000 applications for asylum in Germany in 2015 and 722,000 in 2016. Most of these migrants came from Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq and Albania (Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge [BAMF], 2017, pp.  18–20), although there were slight variations between the 2 years. Since 2017, the number has fallen; there were 198,000 asylum applications in 2017 and 162,000 in 2018 (BAMF, 2018, 2019). In comparison to the general population, there are also differences in the legal status, and the socio-demographic and socio-economic characteristics of distinct groups with a migrant background, such as foreign migrants, repatriated ethnic

5  Social Work and Inclusive Society in Germany

117

Germans or refugees. For example, in 2017 the average age of people with a migrant background in Germany was 35.4 years, thus considerably younger than the average of 46.7  years for those without a migrant background (Destatis, 2019c). For this reason, in comparison to the general population, a higher percentage of people from migrant backgrounds are unmarried and attending school or vocational training, and a lower percentage are retired. Regarding gender distribution, 51.4% of those with a migrant background are male and 48.6% are female (Destatis, 2019d). Furthermore, those without German citizenship are less likely to have school or vocational qualifications; in 2013, 37% of migrants had no vocational qualification (Tucci, 2016, p. 239). They are also more likely to be unemployed or employed in unskilled, low-paid jobs leading to low incomes and an increased risk of poverty. Non-German citizens with a migrant background are four times more likely to be affected by these disadvantages than the general population and twice as likely as Germans with a migrant background (Brückner, 2016, pp.  226–28, 230–34). Overall, people with a migrant background experience disadvantages and face discrimination in the following areas in particular: the economy, politics, legal status and education; even the second and third generations face significant inequality (Grimmig, 2016, p. 55). 5.2.4.1  Social Work in the Field of Migration Social work practitioners play an important role in building an inclusive society that incorporates migrants and their descendants; this takes place through participation in networks with educational institutions, and involvement in labour market policy and healthcare systems (Hamburger, 2016, p. 451). Due to its role as part of social policy, social work practice is caught between the poles of facilitating ‘empowerment and liberation’ (International Federation of Social Workers, 2014) and legislation which may directly lead to the exclusion of migrants. The precarious nature of social work funding can be problematic. Resources and funding made available to deal with the emergence or peak of a particular social problem are often quickly discontinued (Hamburger, 2016, p. 457 f.). For instance, in the field of social work with refugees, the large influx of refugees in 2015 and 2016 exposed the extent to which the corporatist welfare state relied on civic engagement to deal with the situation. The level of engagement was unexpectedly high, with a huge number of citizens of all ages becoming actively involved in various ways; this has become known as welcoming culture (Willkommenskultur) (see Beckmann, Hoose, & Schönauer, 2017, p. 1 f.). On the one hand, this practical support revealed a high societal potential for cooperation and cohesion, even though this commitment was also rejected by some sections of society. On the other hand, the partial transfer of the responsibilities of the state to volunteers and civil society can be criticised as a deterioration of social rights. Van Dyk, Dowling, and Haubner (2016) describe the way in which the revival of charity is characterised by personal dependence and hierarchies (p.  39). This contrasts with the achievements of the

118

S. Bundschuh et al.

welfare state in decoupling social security and social relationships via a mechanism of compensation through social security legislation. Furthermore, social work has inadvertently contributed to the definition of people with a migrant background as needy or problematic; members of this group are thus classified as other (Shure, 2017, p. 647). The concept of othering refers to the discourse on foreignness as a forceful hegemonic practice; by constructing the others either as barbaric or idyllic/exotic, this simultaneously creates an us with a common identity free of ambivalences and tensions (Castro Varela & Mecheril, 2010, p. 42). Unless the incapability of institutions to deal with a more diverse population is addressed and challenged, discrimination will continue to be fundamental to these construction processes (Shure, 2017, p. 647; Hamburger, 2016, p. 452). The following sections outline social work practice with two different generational groups with migrant backgrounds: the provision of care for elderly people and education for children and young people. 5.2.4.2  Care Provision Issues in a (Post-)Migrant Society The first-generation  migrants, who came to Germany in the 1950s and 1960s, mostly arrived alone: this is the case for 98% of people with a migrant background who are over the age of 50 (Hoffmann & Romeu Gordo, 2016, p. 64). In the near future, these individuals will be faced with the issue of growing old in Germany. Due to their working conditions, this group is more likely to have experienced social disadvantages and difficult living conditions, often resulting in health problems. Consequently, there is likely to be an increase in their need for care. Whilst the demand for care for the elderly is increasing across the population due to demographic change, needs amongst elderly migrant groups may be higher due to their specific fields of work and prior health conditions (Kohls, 2012, pp. 28, 32 f.). Older people with a migrant background also tend to use available healthcare services differently to the general population; those in need of care are more likely to be receiving financial benefits as opposed to benefits in kind (Sachleistungen), and they use professional care less often than Germans without a migrant background (Bundesministerium für Gesundheit, 2011, p.  61  f.; Kohls, 2012, pp.  31, 34). Several reasons have been identified for this limited use of professional care and healthcare services. These include: difficulties communicating in German, religious, cultural and familial barriers (Brzoska & Razum, 2009; Glodny, Yilmaz-­ Aslan, & Butenuth-Thör, 2009; Schenk, 2008), a lack of information about the care available through care insurance (Kohls, 2012), insufficient connections between care providers and migrant communities (Kamps, 2013) and insufficient attention paid to specific (cultural and religious) needs (Mogar & von Kutzleben, 2015; Yilmaz-Aslan, 2013). According to Kohls (2012), these factors contribute to the inappropriate care which is often provided to older people with a migrant background who require support, assistance and nursing care (pp. 32, 34). Although it can be assumed that there might be slight differences in how services are utilised by people with a migrant background, it should be noted that, in general,

5  Social Work and Inclusive Society in Germany

119

the care system which funds these services is oriented towards families as being responsible for covering care needs (see Hagedorn & Neher, 2017, p. 2). Accordingly, in 2015, three quarters of all those in need of care were cared for at home; two-thirds of them were cared for entirely by family members without the involvement of professional care services (Destatis, 2017). There is hence a need for a critical assessment of whether the frequent focus in scientific literature on individual deficits related to a person’s migrant background, as mentioned above, should be broadened to encompass the structural dimensions of accessibility to the professional care system. In accordance with the focus on culture and migrant background in public health research, at least two strategies have been identified for improving access to health services for people with a migrant background: establishing culturally specific services, or including people with a migrant background in standard care (Regelversorgung) through the intercultural opening (Interkulturelle Öffnung) of social and healthcare services. Culture-specific approaches assume that there are relevant differences between migrant groups and non-migrant groups—mostly relating to nationality—and this has led to the establishment of specific services for particular migrant groups, such as care services for Turkish people or addiction counselling for migrants. However, some intercultural or transcultural concepts consider these differences to be too complex and contingent; such specific services will therefore not be able to cope with all variations. Moreover, these types of services tend to culturalise the risk factors resulting from disadvantageous social conditions (Geiger & Razum, 2016, pp. 617, 627–30). Whilst culture-specific services risk being discriminatory if they promote a transfer of responsibility from general to specialised services, such specific approaches, which support self-representation and self-organisation, can effectively complement general services, at least as a first step for recent migrants (Eppenstein & Kiesel, 2008, p. 58 f.). 5.2.4.3  Inclusive Education and Migration In the field of education, a critique of othering is reflected in the migration and education approach (Migrationspädagogik), which has been developed since 2000 (Mecheril, 2010, p.  21). This approach criticises the prevalent construction of homogeneous cultures in concepts of intercultural education, as well as the lack of understanding of the highly differentiated lifeworlds in contemporary society. In its critique of racism (Rassismuskritik), this approach goes beyond an anti-racist perspective by reflecting on the involvement of institutions and professionals in discriminatory social structures. There are key common aspects in research on inclusive education and Migrationspädagogik (Dannenbeck, 2016, p. 480). Professionals in schools have to combine a vision of an inclusive school for everyone with the reality of the institutional processes of school development (Shure, 2017, p. 645). Following a period of debate on the structural and organisational questions related to inclusion, the focus

120

S. Bundschuh et al.

has more recently shifted to the integration of young refugees (and their families) and how this challenges or jeopardises standards in an (inclusive) educational system (Dannenbeck, 2016, p. 482). In the face of these challenges, professionals often articulate their need for clear recommendations on measures to maintain or reestablish professional agency (Shure, 2017, p. 644 f.). The simplification of complex social realities, however, does not help to analyse and address exclusionary and discriminatory practices in mainstream institutions. This is also shown by the fact that higher inclusion quotas can often lead to the increased separation of particular groups (Dannenbeck, 2016, p. 485 f.). Due to this focus on migration-related challenges, the mechanisms and dynamics of social exclusion (e.g. increasing social stratification) and the economisation of the social have become less visible (Dannenbeck, 2016, p. 483 f.). New concurrences have emerged, while social structures of difference and intersectionality have fallen from view (Shure, 2017, p. 648 f.). Inclusive Practice in a Special Needs School: A Project Report The project KODEX—Koblenz Diversity Experiment: Strategies of empowerment to support resilience for the successful social and vocational integration of marginalised youth (Bundschuh, Ghandour, & Herzog, 2016) worked with pupils, teachers, social work students and employees at two participating companies. The project took an awareness-raising approach, which involved intensive networking and cooperation to increase public awareness about the inclusion of educationally disadvantaged groups. Regular activities were carried out at the participating special school for children with learning difficulties and developmental/emotional disorders. By integrating elements of extracurricular youth education into a school setting, the project aimed to improve pupils’ transitions to further learning opportunities, vocational training and professional occupations. The project goals were: educational inclusion, vocational integration, social participation and reducing individual and institutional discrimination. One focus of the project was on the educational situation of Sinti and Roma, because these groups have experienced ongoing educational discrimination. Moreover, there is a long-established Sinti community in Koblenz, which has self-­ organised structures. In addition, the administrator of the project, who is of Sinti origin, has worked with the community in an advisory capacity for many years. As part of the project activities, weekly units of team teaching were implemented in six classes (from grades seven to nine); the teaching teams were composed of educational specialists from the project and different teachers at the school. Subprojects were created with different classes dealing with issues such as children’s rights, engagement in civil society or preparing for life after school (Ghandour & Herzog, 2016, pp. 192–198; Herzog, 2016, pp. 198–206). In groups, the pupils worked on developing their social, language or presentation skills, as well as on

5  Social Work and Inclusive Society in Germany

121

media literacy. In addition, the classes participating in the project took part in multi-­ day workshops on the university campus led by external coaches. These covered topics such as gender, diversity, personal biographies and vocational choices. Furthermore, the participating companies organised workplace visits for the pupils. The project also provided workshops for teachers and company staff run by external coaches. These addressed the topics of gender mainstreaming, diversity management, different types of discrimination and educational issues. Due to budget constraints, it was only possible to evaluate the project selectively. In relation to the workshops for pupils, a quantitative survey was conducted and three qualitative interviews with pupils were carried out. This evaluation, along with the project team’s reflections on the activities, provided valuable insights into the challenges and constraints of the project from different perspectives. In summary, the aim of bringing the pupils into contact with the university had a positive outcome as it successfully strengthened pupils’ self-confidence. Furthermore, empowerment processes could be observed. For instance, pupils were able to remember various project topics after an extended period of time; they also made use of and reflected on strategies for conflict prevention and management in different everyday contexts. With regard to the school in general, the project successfully integrated a non-formal educational programme into the regular school curriculum and all the participating teachers were actively involved. Furthermore, the companies showed great openness and indicated their willingness to offer internships to students from special schools in the future. However, despite the openness shown by the participating companies, the transition from school to vocational education remains a challenge for children with learning difficulties or developmental/emotional disorders. Another study carried out in the Koblenz–Middle Rhine region showed that companies have little experience of dealing with trainees who attended special schools. This is mainly due to the fact that these specialised training programmes, which do not lead to a vocational qualification, are not recognised by companies which offer apprenticeships (Kröhnert & Wirz, 2017, pp.  31, 75  f.). However, in Rhineland-Palatinate, two-­ thirds of those who leave school with no qualifications attended special schools and participated in specialised training programmes. Throughout the project, it became very clear that there were several restrictions with regard to effectiveness and sustainability. There was no sustainability in terms of continuing the programme, or expanding it to include other schools and other institutional or communal measures. The possibility of integrating youth work approaches into a school context was limited by different curricular and institutional guidelines. Institutional issues, such as school development or the involvement of parents, were not addressed. The project’s strong focus on the pupils, however, inevitably led to a focus on individualised structural problems (Bundschuh, 2016, p. 34 f.). As a result, it was not possible to fully focus on the key issue of how educational, public and employment structures can and need to be changed in order to facilitate inclusion.

122

S. Bundschuh et al.

5.3  Current Debates on Inclusion The debates discussed in this section focus on the field of education and child and youth services. This corresponds with the above discussion of inclusion and separation in educational and social work contexts.

5.3.1  The Least Restrictive Environment Principle and the Dilemma of Difference Since the ratification of the UN CRPD, in an educational context, any separation of children with special needs from other pupils requires clearer justification than in the past. According to the World Report on Disability, an educational system can be considered inclusive if it is structured by the principle of the least restrictive environment (World Health Organisation [WHO], 2011). This principle clearly prefers settings in which children with and without special needs learn together, but at the same time, it maintains different settings and options. The recognition that no single educational model or setting can serve the needs of all children at all times is fundamental to the principle. All professionals need to be aware that the provision of specialised help through institutional differentiation can potentially result in stigmatisation. Whilst there is no clear solution to this dilemma, it should be considered during any decision-­ making process relating to special needs support. Such processes should always focus on a student’s needs, strengths and wishes. It is also important to bear in mind that, even in inclusive settings, specialised support may be perceived as stigmatising by the student. There has been criticism that the implementation of inclusion in Germany has been used to reduce costs by decreasing the provision of special or therapeutic services within educational settings (Wohlfahrt, 2014). The studies presented here seem to support this claim. There is a danger that implementing full inclusion could lead to a trivialisation of disability. Taking a purely social constructivist approach to disability would result in the ceasing of all special measures and settings which compensate for or reduce the impact of impairments. Whilst the World Report on Disability clearly advocates for inclusion, throughout the document, the authors highlight the need for flexibility, both with regard to educational settings and curricula content. They reiterate that children with special needs should be taught in a way that is as close as possible to the mainstream system (WHO, 2011, p. 226). Such a view implies that full inclusion may not be possible for all children at all times (cf. Felder & Schneiders, 2016) and is closely connected to the principle of the least restrictive environment. It would be interesting to apply the principle of the least restrictive environment—which was developed in the field of disabilities—to other social problems. In the research project on older drug users discussed earlier, this principle is considered with regard to issues such as providing specialised care, housing, treatment and

5  Social Work and Inclusive Society in Germany

123

counselling facilities, as opposed to the inclusion of older drug users in facilities for the wider population. Applying this principle to social work concepts could help individuals to identify the least restrictive environment with regard to their specific strengths, resources and problems. A second step could be to link or match individuals with specific needs to educational settings or workplaces which would provide the least restrictive environment. This field of social work needs to be developed further, particularly in relation to educational settings. As is evident from the studies presented here, students with visual impairments, for example, need to develop social skills, self-esteem, endurance and alertness; these are important attributes for all children. However, in order to help children with special needs develop these skills and attributes, specific methods, materials, settings and people (special educators and other professionals, peers, parents and other adult role models with disabilities) may need to be involved. These characteristics will not simply develop without support just because a child with special needs attends a mainstream school. Hence, there is a need for more research on how different children develop these attributes, as well as on the type of support and settings children need. Social workers should focus on the social aspects of inclusion in collaboration with other specialists. Furthermore, it is crucial to overcome environmental and attitudinal barriers. However, to ensure successful inclusion, social work practice needs to consider both, the strengths and needs of individuals and society as a whole. Inclusion is thus a two-way street.

5.3.2  T  he Comprehensive Solution or Inclusive Reform of the Child and Youth Welfare Act The prevailing Child and Youth Welfare Act (Volume Eight of the Social Code [Sozialgesetzbuch VIII, 1990]) was implemented in the federal states in eastern Germany (the former GDR) on third October 1990 and in the federal states of western Germany (the former FRG) on first January 1991. It constituted a change from an act of intervention to an act of services. The act applies to all young people living in Germany, not only to those with German citizenship, as was the case in the previous act. What is more, the act includes young people with emotional/psychiatric disabilities (Struck, 2016, p. 670 f.). There have been further key developments over the past three decades, these include the introduction of a legal entitlement to a place in an early childhood education facility and the strengthening of child protection laws (Struck, 2016, p. 667; summaries of the act can be found in Schmid-Obkirchner, 2015; Wabnitz, 2015a; Wiesner, 2016; for a more detailed description, see Wabnitz, 2015b). However, one important issue remains unresolved: the inclusion of young people with physical or intellectual disabilities into the Child and Youth Welfare Act. During the drafting of the act, there were discussions regarding whether to incorporate a partial solution, which excludes some areas, or a comprehensive solution,

124

S. Bundschuh et al.

which covers a more extensive range of issues. When the current Child and Youth Welfare Act was introduced, the partial solution was preferred. As a consequence, there are now two acts responsible for children and young people: the Child and Youth Welfare Act and the Social Welfare Act (Wiesner, 2014, p. 56). Young people with emotional/psychiatric disabilities are included in the Child and Youth Welfare Act, whereas those with physical or intellectual disabilities are included under Integration Support in the Social Welfare Act (Book Twelve of the Social Code [Sozialgesetzbuch XII,2003]) (Wiesner, 2014, p. 58). It is primarily a medical diagnosis that determines which of the two acts is responsible (Muche, 2016, p. 1336 f.). In the past 30 years, there have been various problems caused by the overlapping responsibilities between these two acts; experts in the field and politicians tend to favour including responsibility for children with physical or intellectual disabilities under child and youth services. A draft government bill, the Empowering Children and Youth Act, was published in April 2017. Its aim was to anchor inclusion as a guiding principle in child and youth services (Bundesregierung, 2017b, p. 39). This implies the inclusion of all children and young people, with or without disabilities, in the same social institutions, as well as their equal participation in society. The ambitious draft bill contained many unresolved issues and problematic formulations (for a critical discussion of the different stages of the draft, see Voigts, 2017; neue praxis, 5/2016, pp.  484–513 and 6/2016, pp.  574–597; and the website: https://afet-ev.de/themenplattform/sgb-viii-reform-2020). The government at the time did not adopt the bill, and the discussion on an inclusive solution is still ongoing. However, two key topics from the earlier debate are still central to successful inclusion and participation processes in the fields of disability and migration: the decategorisation of disabilities and the challenges of ensuring that young refugees have full rights and do not face discrimination. There are a number of controversial aspects to the bill. First, the comprehensive or inclusive solution does not resolve the complex nature of categorising disabilities. It is currently necessary to categorise disabilities in order to differentiate between able-bodied and disabled people, as well as to differentiate types of disability; this provides the basis for decisions about a young person’s entitlement to benefits. Unless assessment methods are fundamentally changed, this categorisation will remain a controversial but necessary practice within reformed child and youth services. Hence, the comprehensive solution is not inherently inclusive. Inclusion does not only mean responsibility for all young people, it should also involve a critique of categorisation (for more on this controversial discussion, see Lüders, 2014, pp. 55–57). Second, important professional educational support associations warned that the draft bill would codify a two-class system to the disadvantage of unaccompanied minor refugees. Access to child and youth services should depend on a child’s age, not their citizenship. Professional associations criticised the establishment of lower standards, which resulted from the emergency situation in child and youth services due to the high number of young refugees who arrived in Germany in 2015 and 2016. This codification would have jeopardised the unity of the Child and Youth Welfare Act and would have discriminated against young refugees

5  Social Work and Inclusive Society in Germany

125

(Bundesfachverband unbegleitete minderjährige Flüchtlinge, 2017; Bundesverband katholischer Einrichtungen et al., 2017). The planned restrictions stand in a continuum of discriminatory immigration policies and correspond with the current anti-­ immigration sentiments in German society (Zick, Küpper, & Berghan, 2019). In recent years, there has been a lull in the debate on inclusion. The heated discussions about inclusive education programmes in schools have cooled as the focus has shifted to the more practical everyday problems which schools have to resolve. There are now more children in inclusive settings in mainstream schools, as well as in schools for students with special needs. Teachers now work alongside inclusion professionals—mostly social workers or education professionals. Empirical research on prejudice has shown that there is now a low incidence of prejudice against people with disabilities in Germany. Only 2–3.3% of the population are against the idea of the inclusion of disabled people (Zick, Küpper, & Berghan, 2019, pp. 69, 74 f.). However, whilst acceptance of people with disabilities has increased, there has been a rise in hostility towards other disadvantaged groups. The highest level of hostility is against the long-term unemployed, an issue which also greatly affects people with disabilities. Many people (38.1–50.6%) believe this group do not want to get jobs, and 50–63.8% are angry because they think that unemployed people have a comfortable life paid for by the rest of society (Zick, Küpper, & Berghan, 2019, pp. 69, 74 f.). People who hold such beliefs also express the view that anyone who does not participate in the labour market should be completely excluded from society. The level of enmity towards asylum seekers is also significant. Of those interviewed, 28.2–44.2% believe that most asylum seekers are not persecuted in their country of origin. Furthermore, 62.4–74.5% believe that asylum seekers should not receive financial support from the state while their asylum applications are being checked (Zick, Küpper, & Berghan, 2019, pp. 68, 72 f.), and 30.3–34.9% say they sometimes feel like strangers in their own country due to the number of Muslim people (Zick, Küpper, & Berghan, 2019, pp.  67, 70). The privilege of inclusion seems to be reserved only for well-educated professionals from abroad. Alongside the empirical data, the general sentiments in Germany show that there is still a long way to go on the path towards a consistently inclusive and participative society. Furthermore, this points to the extensive work still needed, both in terms of policy and social work practice.

References Ahrbeck, B. (2014). Inklusion – eine Kritik. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer. Allgemeines Gleichbehandlungsgesetz (2006). Retrieved March 17, 2020, from https://www. gesetze-im-internet.de/agg/ Aly, G. (2013). Die Belasteten. ‘Euthanasie’ 1939–1945. Eine Gesellschaftsgeschichte. Frankfurt: Fischer. Antonovsky, A. (1997). Salutogenese: Zur Entmystifizierung der Gesundheit. Tübingen: dgvt.

126

S. Bundschuh et al.

Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung (2014). Bildung in Deutschland 2014. Bielefeld: Bertelsmann. Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung (2018). Bildung in Deutschland 2018: Ein indikatorengestützter Bericht mit einer Analyse zu Wirkungen und Erträgen von Bildung. Bielefeld: WBV. Bade, K.  J., & Oltmer, J. (2004). Normalfall Migration. Bonn: Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung. Beauftragter der Bundesregierung für die Belange behinderter Menschen (2017). Wichtige rechtliche Grundlagen. Retrieved March 18, 2020, from http://www.behindertenbeauftragte.de/DE/ Themen/RechtlicheGrundlagen/RechtlicheGrundlagen_node.html;jsessionid=79E962BB2B4 AF658CCD0FFDDB15E6A5E.2_cid330 Beckmann, F., Hoose, F., & Schönauer, A.-L. (2017). Einstellungen zum sozialen Engagement in der Flüchtlingshilfe. Empirische Befunde aus einem urbanen Ballungsraum. In S. Lessenich (Ed.), Geschlossene Gesellschaften. Verhandlungen des 38. Kongresses der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Soziologie in Bamberg 2016. Retrieved March 18, 2020, from http://publikationen.soziologie.de/index.php/kongressband_2016/article/view/370 Behindertengleichstellungsgesetz (2002). Retrieved March 17, 2020, from http://www.gesetzeim-internet.de/bgg/ Bommes, M., & Scherr, A. (2012). Soziologie der Sozialen Arbeit. Eine Einführung in Formen und Funktionen organisierter Hilfe. Weinheim & Basel: Beltz Juventa. Braeckman, A. (2006). Niklas Luhmann’s systems theoretical redescription of the inclusion/exclusion debate. Philosophy & Social Criticism, 32(1), 65–88. Brückner, G. (2016). Bevölkerung mit Migrationshintergrund. In Destatis & WZB  – Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (Eds.), Datenreport 2016. Ein Sozialbericht für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland (pp.  218–235). Bonn: Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung. Brzoska, P., & Razum, O. (2009). Krankheitsbewältigung bei Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund im Kontext von Kultur und Religion. Zeitschrift für Medizinische Psychologie, 18, 151–161. Bundesagentur für Arbeit (2019). Der Arbeitsmarkt in Deutschland. Kurzinformation: Der Arbeitsmarkt für schwerbehinderte Menschen. Retrieved March 18, 2020, from https://statistik.arbeitsagentur.de/Statischer-Content/Arbeitsmarktberichte/Personengruppen/generischePublikationen/Brosch-Die-Arbeitsmarktsituation-schwerbehinderter-Menschen.pdf Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge (BAMF) (2017). Das Bundesamt in Zahlen 2016. Asyl, Migration und Integration. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://www.bamf. de/SharedDocs/Anlagen/DE/Statistik/BundesamtinZahlen/bundesamt-in-zahlen-2016. pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=16 Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge (BAMF) (2018). Das Bundesamt in Zahlen 2017. Asyl, Migration und Integration. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://www.bamf. de/SharedDocs/Anlagen/DE/Statistik/BundesamtinZahlen/bundesamt-in-zahlen-2017. pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=14 Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge (BAMF) (2019). Das Bundesamt in Zahlen 2018. Asyl, Migration und Integration. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://www.bamf. de/SharedDocs/Anlagen/DE/Statistik/BundesamtinZahlen/bundesamt-in-zahlen-2018. pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=16 Bundesarbeitsgemeinschaft der Freien Wohlfahrtspflege (2018). Gesamtstatistik 2016. Einrichtungen und Dienste der Freien Wohlfahrtspflege. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://www.bagfw.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Veroeffentlichungen/Publikationen/Statistik/ BAGFW_Gesamtstatistik_2016.pdf Bundesarbeitsgemeinschaft der überörtlichen Träger der Sozialhilfe & con_sens (2019). Kennzahlenvergleich Eingliederungshilfe der überörtlichen Träger der Sozialhilfe 2017. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://www.lwl.org/spur-download/bag/190306_BAGueS_ Bericht_2017_final.pdf

5  Social Work and Inclusive Society in Germany

127

Bundesarbeitsgemeinschaft Wohnungslosenhilfe e.V. (2017). BAG Wohnungslosenhilfe: 860.000 Menschen in 2016 ohne Wohnung. Prognose: 1,2 Millionen Wohnungslose bis 2018. Pressemitteilung vom 14.11.2017. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://www.bagw.de/ media/doc/PRM_2017_11_14_Schaetzung_der_Zahl_der_Wohnungslosen.pdf Bundesfachverband unbegleitete minderjährige Flüchtlinge e.V. (2017). Stellungnahme zur Umsetzung des Koalitionsbeschlusses vom 29.03.2017 im Gesetzentwurf zur Stärkung von Kindern und Jugendlichen (Kinder- und Jugendstärkungsgesetz  – KJSG). Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://b-umf.de/src/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Stellungnahme_ Koalitionsbeschluss-KJSG_18.04.2017.pdf Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Soziales (2018). Sozialbudget 2017. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://www.bmas.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/PDF-Publikationen/a230-17-sozialbudget-2017.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2 Bundesministerium für Gesundheit (2011). Abschlussbericht zur Studie Wirkungen des Pflege-Weiterentwicklungsgesetzes. Retrieved March 18, 2020, from https://www. bundesgesundheitsministerium.de/fileadmin/Dateien/Publikationen/Pflege/Berichte/ Abschlussbericht_zur_Studie_Wirkungen_des_Pflege-Weiterentwicklungsgesetzes.pdf Bundesregierung (2017a). Lebenslagen in Deutschland. Der Fünfte Armuts- und Reichtumsbericht der Bundesregierung. Retrieved March 18, 2020, from https://www.armuts-und-reichtumsbericht.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/Berichte/5-arb-langfassung.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=6 Bundesregierung (2017b). Entwurf eines Gesetzes zur Stärkung von Kindern und Jugendlichen (Kinder- und Jugendstärkungsgesetz). Retrieved March 18, 2020, from https://www.bmfsfj.de/ blob/119160/c8ba3f56a357ec2ffd96b1146f10d0bd/referentenentwurf-kjsg-data.pdf Bundesverband katholischer Einrichtungen und Dienste der Erziehungshilfen e.V., Evangelischer Erziehungsverband, & Internationale Gesellschaft für erzieherische Hilfen (2017). Zwischenruf an die Abgeordneten. Reform der Kinder- und Jugendhilfe und Öffnungsklausel: Separierungsanreize gegen junge Flüchtlinge und Teilung der Kinder- und Jugendhilfe verhindern! Retrieved March 16, 2020, from www.igfh.de/cms/nachrichten/ verbände-aufruf-gemeinsam-gegen-umf-sonderregelungen-im-geplanten-kjsg-aktiv-werden Bundesverwaltungsamt (2019). Spätaussiedler und ihre Angehörigen. Jahresstatistik 2018. Retrieved March 18, 2020, from https://www.bva.bund.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/ DE/Buerger/Migration-Integration/Spaetaussiedler/Statistik/J_Jahresstatistik2018. pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2 Bundschuh, S. (2016). Bildung als Versprechen und Illusion. Mit einem Anhang von Ralph Klingenberg. In S.  Bundschuh, E.  Ghandour, & E.  Herzog (Eds.), Bildungsförderung und Diskriminierung  – marginalisierte Jugendliche zwischen Schule und Beruf (pp.  18–45). Weinheim & Basel: Beltz Juventa. Bundschuh, S., Ghandour, E., & Herzog, E. (Eds.) (2016). Bildungsförderung und Diskriminierung – marginalisierte Jugendliche zwischen Schule und Beruf. Weinheim & Basel: Beltz Juventa. Castro Varela, M., & Mecheril, P. (2010). Grenze und Bewegung. Migrationswissenschaftliche Klärungen. In P.  Mecheril et  al. (Eds.), Migrationspädagogik (pp.  23–53). Weinheim & Basel: Beltz. Dannenbeck, C. (2016). Inklusion. In P.  Mecheril (Ed.), Handbuch Migrationspädagogik (pp. 480–492). Weinheim: Beltz. Destatis (2017). Pflegestatistik 2015. Pflege im Rahmen der Pflegeversicherung. Deutschlandergebnisse. Statistisches Bundesamt. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://www.destatis.de/GPStatistik/servlets/MCRFileNodeServlet/DEHeft_derivate_00042871/5224001159004.pdf Destatis (2019a). Migration und Integration. Personen mit Migrationshintergrund. Statistisches Bundesamt. Retrieved March 18, 2020, from https://www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/ Gesellschaft-Umwelt/Bevoelkerung/Migration-Integration/Methoden/migrationshintergrund. html?nn=208952 Destatis (2019b). Migration und Integration. Bevölkerung in Privathaushalten nach Migrationshintergrund. Statistisches Bundesamt. Retrieved March 18, 2020, from https://

128

S. Bundschuh et al.

www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/Gesellschaft-Umwelt/Bevoelkerung/Migration-Integration/ Tabellen/migrationshintergrund-geschlecht-insgesamt.html Destatis (2019c). Migration und Integration. Bevölkerung in Privathaushalten nach Migrationshintergrund und Altersgruppen. Statistisches Bundesamt. Retrieved March 18, 2020, from https://www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/Gesellschaft-Umwelt/Bevoelkerung/ Migration-Integration/Tabellen/migrationshintergrund-alter.html Destatis (2019d). Migration und Integration. Bevölkerung in Privathaushalten nach Migrationshintergrund und Geschlecht. Statistisches Bundesamt. Retrieved March 18, 2020, from https://www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/Gesellschaft-Umwelt/Bevoelkerung/MigrationIntegration/Tabellen/liste-migrationshintergrund-geschlecht.html Elias, N., & Scotson, J.  L. (1965/2009). The established and the outsiders. London: Sage Publications. Eppenstein, T., & Kiesel, D. (2008). Soziale Arbeit interkulturell. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer. Felder, M., & Schneiders, K. (2016). Inklusion kontrovers. Herausforderungen für die Soziale Arbeit. Schwalbach am Taunus: Wochenschau. Foroutan, N. (2015). Die postmigrantische Gesellschaft. Kurzdossier “Die Einheit der Verschiedenen. Integration in der postmigrantischen Gesellschaft”. Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from www.bpb.de/gesellschaft/migration/ kurzdossiers/205190/die-postmigrantische-gesellschaft Foroutan, N. (2018). Die postmigrantische Perspektive: Aushandlungsprozesse in pluralen Gesellschaften. In M.  Hill & E.  Yildiz (Eds.), Postmigrantische Visionen. Erfahrungen – Ideen – Reflexionen (pp. 15–27). Bielefeld: transcript. Foroutan, N. (2019). Die postmigrantische Gesellschaft. Ein Versprechen der pluralen Demokratie. Bielefeld: transcript. Franke, A., & Witte, M. (2009). Das HEDE-Training. Manual zur Gesundheitsförderung auf der Basis der Salutogenese. Bern: Huber-Verlag. Frietsch, R., & Holbach, D. (2016). Lebensorientierung für junge Wohnungslose. Fachlichkeit durch Genderdifferenzierung, Salutogenese, Ressourcenorientierung, Case Management. Materialien zur Gesundheitsförderung, Ausgabe 306. Landeszentrale für Gesundheitsförderung in Rheinland-Pfalz e.V. Frietsch, R., & Holbach, D. (2017). Perspektiven für junge Wohnungslose. Ergebnisse zum Modellprojekt: “Schnittstellenmanagement in der Wohnungslosenhilfe in der Region Koblenz”. Tagungsdokumentation. Hochschule Koblenz, Fachbereich Sozialwissenschaften, Institut für Forschung und Weiterbildung. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://www.hskoblenz.de/fileadmin/media/fb_sozialwissenschaften/IFW/Fachtag_Projekt_Wohnungslose/ Schnittstellenmanagement_Wohnungslosenhilfe.pdf Frühauf, T. (2012). Von der Integration zur Inklusion – Ein Überblick. In A. Hinz, I. Körner, & U. Niehoff (Eds.), Von der Integration zur Inklusion (pp. 11–35). Marburg: Lebenshilfe. Geiger, I. K., & Razum, O. (2016). Migration und Gesundheit. In K. Hurrelmann & O. Razum (Eds.), Handbuch Gesundheitswissenschaften (pp. 609–638). Weinheim & Basel: Juventa. Gerull, S., & Merckens, M. (2012). Erfolgskriterien in der Hilfe für Menschen mit besonderen sozialen Schwierigkeiten. Folgestudie: Aktenanalyse und Diskussion der Gesamtergebnisse. Uckerland: Schibri-Verlag. Ghandour, E., & Herzog, E. (2016). Das “Spiel unseres Lebens”. Vorbereitung auf das Leben jenseits des Klassenzimmers. In S. Bundschuh, E. Ghandour, & E. Herzog (Eds.), Bildungsförderung und Diskriminierung – marginalisierte Jugendliche zwischen Schule und Beruf (pp. 192–198). Weinheim & Basel: Beltz Juventa. Glodny, S., Yilmaz-Aslan, Y., & Butenuth-Thör, S. (2009). Pflegebegutachtungen bei Migrantinnen und Migranten. In T. Gaertner et al. (Eds.), Die Pflegeversicherung. Handbuch zur Begutachtung, Qualitätsprüfung, Beratung und Fortbildung (pp. 164–170). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Grimmig, M. (2016). Einwanderer, Einwanderung. In A. Scherr (Ed.), Soziologische Basics. Eine Einführung für pädagogische und soziale Berufe (pp. 51–59). Wiesbaden: Springer.

5  Social Work and Inclusive Society in Germany

129

Grohs, S., & Reiter, R. (2014). Kommunale Sozialpolitik. Handlungsoptionen bei engen Spielräumen. Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. Retrieved March 17, 2020, from https://library.fes.de/ pdf-files/wiso/11017.pdf Grohs, S., Schneiders, K., & Heinze, R.  G. (2017). The institutional embeddedness of social entrepreneurship in Germany. Voluntas  – International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 28(6), 2569–2591. Habermas, J. (2017, May 3). Keine Muslima muss Herrn de Maizière die Hand geben. Rheinische Post online. Retrieved March 18, 2020, from www.rp-online.de/politik/deutschland/ leitkultur-das-sagt-juergen-habermas-zur-debatte-aid-1.6793232 Hagedorn, J., & Neher, L. (2017). Familie und Alter  – Lebensformen zwischen Deinstitutionalisierung und pflegepolitischer Reinstitutionalisierung. Ethikundgesellschaft, 1(2017). Hamburger, F. (2016). Sozialpädagogik. In P.  Mecheril (Ed.), Handbuch Migrationspädagogik (pp. 449–464). Weinheim: Beltz. Heinze, R.  G., Naegele, G., & Schneiders, K. (2011). Wirtschaftliche Potenziale des Alters. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer. Heinze, R.  G., & Schneiders, K. (2014). Wohlfahrtskorporatismus unter Druck. Zur Ökonomisierung der Sozialpolitik und des sozialen Dienstleistungssektors. In G.  S. Schaal, M. Lemke, & C. Ritzi (Eds.), Die Ökonomisierung der Politik in Deutschland. Eine vergleichende Politikfeldanalyse (pp. 45–68). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Heise, E.-M., & Krägeloh, M. (2010). Veränderte Bedarfe und Bedürfnisse wohnungsloser Frauen am Beispiel der Berliner Notübernachtung für Frauen. In S. Gillich & S. Nagel (Eds.), Von der Armenhilfe zur Wohnungslosenhilfe – und zurück? (pp. 219–227). Gründau-Rothenbergen: TRIGA-Verlag. Herzog, E. (2016). “Können wir doch was anderes machen? Das deprimiert voll.” Kinderrechte thematisieren vor dem Hintergrund von Ungerechtigkeit. In S.  Bundschuh, E.  Ghandour, & E.  Herzog (Eds.), Bildungsförderung und Diskriminierung  – marginalisierte Jugendliche zwischen Schule und Beruf (pp. 198–206). Weinheim & Basel: Beltz Juventa. Hoffmann, E., & Romeu Gordo, L. (2016). Lebenssituation älterer Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund. In Destatis & WZB – Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (Eds.), Datenreport 2016. Ein Sozialbericht für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland (pp. 64–77). Bonn: Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung. Högner, N. (2017). Inklusion hochgradig sehbehinderter und blinder Schülerinnen und Schüler in Heidelberg und Berlin. In Verband für Blinden- und Sehbehindertenpädagogik e.V. (Ed.), Kongressbericht: Perspektiven im Dialog. Kongressbericht des XXXVI. Kongress für Blindenund Sehbehindertenpädagogik. 01.08. bis 05.08.2016 in Graz. Würzburg: Edition Bentheim. Retrieved March 22, 2020, from https://www.edition-bentheim.de/download/!M0JhUkRHckhLWHVEb2J2dTVTME9WZnZvM3U3a2JyUTN3bGMxdTBHUW9aREJuVGZqOVk2 cDVKQkZxUDh5c1pVM2hwazNtcmkwaTVrbkxKSEJFZzhPdXU1d0U5em1MNnhMZUMycnpvOUhtME5yQXhxTituMGFlSkNZaElZenUxbkFkc3AvN2t4RDdiVmRjNjIwSmFFQWlHZFJ0cytEbzZSZnBnS1JCc2Q1OUdvK3dzN2Zxb1RWemNoMS9SRk1zWDBYVXdsTW1nTnZQVjY4RlBBSzdDdjViKzVZWWhnQmRDRlRia1FEUHhFQThvSVFtYyt6c2xHaWlIOTRGQ1FHNkZmaHlnN2RjMkw2Yi9UN1kvdnJYcDRZSWc9PQ../as/ Hoegner-Inklusion.docx Högner, N., Arndt, V., & Kober, A. (2017). Entwicklung und Bedingungen inklusiver Beschulung im Förderschwerpunkt Sehen im Bundesland Berlin. blind/sehbehindert, 137(3), 182–190. International Federation of Social Workers (2014). Global definition of social work. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from http://ifsw.org/get-involved/global-definition-of-social-work Jantzen, W. (1998). 25 Jahre Empfehlung der Bildungskommission des Deutschen Bundesrates zur pädagogischen Förderung behinderter und von Behinderung bedrohter Kinder und Jugendlicher. Weiterentwicklung – Stillstand – Rückschritt. Zeitschrift für Heilpädagogik, 49(1), 18–25.

130

S. Bundschuh et al.

Kaluza, G. (2011). Salute! Was die Seele stark macht. Programm zur Förderung psychosozialer Gesundheitsressourcen. Marburg: Klett-Cotta. Kamps, M. (2013). Menschen mit türkischem Migrationshintergrund und Demenzerkrankung: Wege zur Integration in das Pflege- und Betreuungssystem. Archiv für Wissenschaft und Praxis der sozialen Arbeit, 44(3), 86–90. Kohls, M. (2012). Pflegebedürftigkeit und Nachfrage nach Pflegeleistungen von Migrantinnen und Migranten im demographischen Wandel. Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://www.bamf.de/SharedDocs/Anlagen/DE/Forschung/ Forschungsberichte/fb12-pflegebeduerftigkeit-pflegeleistungen.pdf;jsessionid=7D3D8C7 4D0815B2C99AA977B48894DDC.internet561?__blob=publicationFile&v=11 Kröhnert, S., & Wirz, J. (2017). Bildung in der Region Koblenz-Mittelrhein vor dem Hintergrund des demografischen Wandels. Hochschule Koblenz, Fachbereich Sozialwissenschaften, Institut für Forschung und Weiterbildung. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://www.hs-koblenz. de/fileadmin/media/fb_sozialwissenschaften/IFW/Bildungsstudie/Studie_Bildung_in_der_ Region_Koblenz-Mittelrhein.pdf Kronauer, M. (2010). Exklusion. Die Gefährdung des Sozialen im hoch entwickelten Kapitalismus. Frankfurt am Main: Campus. Kuhlmann, S., Bogumil, J., & Grohs, S. (2008). Evaluating administrative modernization in German local governments: Success or failure of the “new steering model”? Public Administration Review, 68(5), 851–863. Lang, M., & Heyl, V. (2013). Inklusion blinder und hochgradig sehbehinderter Schülerinnen und Schüler. In Verband für Blinden- und Sehbehindertenpädagogik e. V. (Ed.), Vielfalt und Qualität. Kongressbericht zum XXXV.  Kongress für Blinden- und Sehbehindertenpädagogik vom 30. Juli–3. August 2012 in Chemnitz (pp. 105–114). Würzburg: Edition Bentheim. Lüders, C. (2014). “Irgendeinen Begriff braucht es ja…” Das Ringen um Inklusion in der Kinderund Jugendhilfe. Soziale Passagen, 6, 21–53. Luhmann, N. (1997). Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Luhmann, N. (2013). Theory of Society, Volume 2. Stanford: Stanford University Press.  Mecheril, P. (2010). Migrationspädagogik. Hinführung zu einer Perspektive. In P. Mecheril et al. (Eds.), Migrationspädagogik (pp. 7–22). Weinheim & Basel: Beltz. Mogar, M., & von Kutzleben, M. (2015). Demenz in Familien mit türkischem Migrationshintergrund. Organisation und Merkmale häuslicher Versorgungsarrangements. Zeitschrift für Gerontologie und Geriatrie, 48(5), 465–472. Muche, C. (2016). Inklusion. In W. Schröer, N. Struck, & M. Wolff (Eds.), Handbuch Kinder- und Jugendhilfe (pp. 1332–1350). Weinheim & München: Beltz Juventa. Nemesh-Baier, B. (2014). Zugehörigkeit. In G.  Friesenhahn, D.  Braun, & R.  Ningel (Eds.), Handlungsräume Sozialer Arbeit (pp. 303–312). Opladen & Toronto: Barbara Budrich. Pfaff, H. (2012). Lebenslagen der behinderten Menschen  – Ergebnis des Mikrozensus 2009. Wirtschaft und Statistik, 3, 232–243. Poutrus, P. G. (2015). Aufnahme in die “geschlossene Gesellschaft”. Remigranten, Übersiedler, ausländische Studierende und Arbeitsmigranten in der DDR.  In J.  Oltmer (Ed.), Handbuch Staat und Migration in Deutschland seit dem 17. Jahrhundert (pp. 967–996). Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter. Reece, A.  S. (2007). Evidence of accelerated ageing in clinical drug addiction from immune, hepatic and metabolic biomarkers. Immunity & Aging, 4, 6. Reece, A. S., & Hulse, G. K. (2013). Lifetime opiate exposure as an independent and interactive cardiovascular risk factor in males: a cross-sectional clinical study. Vascular Health and Risk Management, 9, 551–561. Schenk, L. (2008). Gesundheit und Krankheit älterer und alter Migranten. In A.  Kuhlmey & D. Schaeffer (Eds.), Alter, Gesundheit und Krankheit (pp. 156–174). Bern: Huber. Schirilla, N. (2017). Pendelmigration – keine Inklusion? Inklusion im Kontext von Migration und Transnationalität. In C. Spatschek & B. Thiessen (Eds.), Inklusion und Soziale Arbeit. Teilhabe

5  Social Work and Inclusive Society in Germany

131

und Vielfalt als gesellschaftliche Gestaltungsfelder (pp. 155–164). Opladen, Berlin & Toronto: Barbara Budrich. Schirmer, W., & Michailakis, D. (2015). The Luhmannian approach to exclusion/inclusion and its relevance to Social Work. Journal of Social Work, 15(1), 45–64. Schmid, M. (2013). Case Management als Antwort auf Probleme der Inklusion/Exklusion in modernen Sozialstaaten. In C. Ehlers & W. Broer (Eds.), Case Management in der Sozialen Arbeit (pp. 19–38). Leverkusen: Barbara Budrich. Schmid, M., Hoff, T., Arendt, I., Follmann-Muth, K., Kuhn, U., & Vogt, I. (2016). Case Management für ältere Drogenabhängige – ein Modellprojekt zu Case Management in der Drogenhilfe. Case Management, 4(2016), 176–182. Schmid-Obkirchner, H. (2015). 25 Jahre SGB VIII: Von der integrativen zur inklusiven Kinder- und Jugendhilfe. In R. Fazekas (Ed.), 25 Jahre SGB VIII: Paradigmenwechsel und Dauerbaustelle (pp. 77–87). Berlin: Verlag des Deutschen Vereins für öffentliche und private Fürsorge. Schneiders, K. (2010). Vom Altenheim zum Seniorenservice. Institutioneller Wandel und Akteurkonstellationen im sozialen Dienstleistungssektor. Baden-Baden: Nomos. Schulte, A., & Treichler, A. (2010). Integration und Antidiskriminierung. Eine interdisziplinäre Einführung. Weinheim & München: Juventa. Schweitzer, H. (2016). Migration und Integration. In W. Schröer, N. Struck, & M. Wolff (Eds.), Handbuch Kinder- und Jugendhilfe (pp. 1285–1331). Weinheim & München: Beltz Juventa. Seckinger, M., Pluto, L., Peucker, C., & van Santen, E. (2016). Einrichtungen der offenen Kinderund Jugendarbeit. Eine empirische Bestandsaufnahme. Weinheim & Basel: Beltz Juventa. Sekretariat der Ständigen Konferenz der Kultusminister der Länder in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (KMK) (2014). Sonderpädagogische Förderung in Schulen 2003 bis 2012. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from http://www.kmk.org/fileadmin/pdf/Statistik/Dokumentationen/ Dokumentation_SoPaeFoe_2012.pdf Sekretariat der Ständigen Konferenz der Kultusminister der Länder in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (KMK) (2016). Sonderpädagogische Förderung in Schulen 2005 bis 2014. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://www.kmk.org/fileadmin/Dateien/pdf/Statistik/ Dokumentationen/Dok_210_SoPae_2014.pdf Sekretariat der Ständigen Konferenz der Kultusminister der Länder in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (KMK) (2018). Sonderpädagogische Förderung in Schulen 2007 bis 2016. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://www.kmk.org/fileadmin/Dateien/pdf/Statistik/ Dokumentationen/Dok_214_SoPaeFoe_2016.pdf Sekretariat der Ständigen Konferenz der Kultusminister der Länder in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (KMK) (2019). Sonderpädagogische Förderung in allgemeinen Schulen ohne Förderschulen 2017/2018 (Korrekturfassung vom 15.04.2019). Retrieved March 18, 2020, from https://www.kmk.org/fileadmin/Dateien/pdf/Statistik/Dokumentationen/Aus_SoPae_ Int_2017.pdf Shure, S. (2017). Was fokussieren (schul-)pädagogische “Inklusionsperspektiven” (eher nicht)? Ein rassismuskritischer Kommentar. In K.  Fereidooni & M.  El (Eds.), Rassismuskritik und Widerstandsformen (pp. 643–656). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Sozialgesetzbuch, Achtes Buch (VIII), Kinder- und Jugendhilfe (1990). Retrieved March 17, 2020, from https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/sgb_8 Sozialgesetzbuch, Neuntes Buch (IX), Rehabilitation und Teilhabe von Menschen mit Behinderungen (2016). Retrieved March 17, 2020, from https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/ sgb_9_2018/BJNR323410016.html Sozialgesetzbuch, Zwölftes Buch (XII), Sozialhilfe (2003). Retrieved March 17, 2020, from https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/sgb_12 Statista (2019). Anzahl der Förderschulen in Deutschland von 2005 bis 2017. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/235854/umfrage/ foerderschulen-in-deutschland/

132

S. Bundschuh et al.

Staub-Bernasconi, S. (2008). Menschenrechte in ihrer Relevanz für die Soziale Arbeit als Theorie und Praxis, oder: Was haben Menschenrechte überhaupt in der Sozialen Arbeit zu suchen? Widersprüche, 28, 9–33. Struck, N. (2016). Kinder- und Jugendhilfegesetz/SGB VIII. In W. Schröer, N. Struck, & M. Wolff (Eds.), Handbuch Kinder- und Jugendhilfe (pp.  666–682). Weinheim & München: Beltz Juventa. Tucci, I. (2016). Lebenssituation von Migranten und deren Nachkommen. In Destatis & WZB – Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (Eds.), Datenreport 2016. Ein Sozialbericht für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland (pp. 236–243). Bonn: Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung. Van Dyk, S., Dowling, E., & Haubner, T. (2016). Für ein rebellisches Engagement. Blätter für deutsche und internationale Politik, 2(2016), 37–40. Vogt, I. (2009). Lebenslagen und Gesundheit älterer Drogenabhängiger. Ein Literaturbericht. Suchttherapie, 10, 17–24. Vogt, I. (Ed.) (2011). Auch Süchtige altern. Probleme und Versorgung älterer Drogenabhängiger. Frankfurt am Main: Fachhochschulverlag. Voigts, G. (2017). Große Lösung?  – Inklusive Lösung?  – SGB VIII-Reform? Inklusion als Herausforderung in der Kinder- und Jugendhilfe. In C.  Spatschek & B.  Thiessen (Eds.), Inklusion und Soziale Arbeit. Teilhabe und Vielfalt als gesellschaftliche Gestaltungsfelder (pp. 127–139). Opladen, Berlin & Toronto: Barbara Budrich. Wabnitz, R. (2015a). Rückblick auf 25 Jahre SGB VIII: die Diskussion und die Reformen. Forum Jugendhilfe, 1, 4–13. Wabnitz, R. (2015b). 25 Jahre SGB VIII—die Geschichte des Achten Buches Sozialgesetzbuch von 1990 bis 2015. Berlin: AGJ. Wansing, G., & Westphal, M. (Eds.) (2014). Behinderung und Migration. Inklusion, Diversität, Intersektionalität. Wiesbaden: Springer. Wiesner, R. (2014). Die große Lösung als eine Etappe auf dem Weg zur Inklusion. Soziale Passagen, 6, 55–58. Wiesner, R. (2016). 25 Jahre KJHG. Rückblick und Ausblick. Jugendhilfereport, 2, 7–11. Winker, G., & Degele, N. (2010). Intersektionalität. Zur Analyse sozialer Ungleichheiten. Bielefeld: transcript. Wohlfahrt, N. (2014). Inklusion als neues Leitbild einer die Ausgabendynamik eingrenzenden Sozialpolitik? Theorie und Praxis der Sozialen Arbeit, 65(1), 8–19. World Health Organisation (WHO) (2011). World report on disability. Geneva: WHO Press. Yilmaz-Aslan, Y. (2013). Gesundheitsversorgung älterer Menschen mit türkischem Migrationshintergrund: Qualitative Befragung von Gesundheitsmediatoren. Zeitschrift für Gerontologie und Geriatrie, 46(4), 346–352. Zick, A., Küpper, B., & Berghan, W. (2019). Verlorene Mitte – feindselige Zustände. Rechtsextreme Einstellungen in Deutschland 2018/19. Bonn: Dietz.

Chapter 6

The Ambivalences of Inclusion in Society and Social Work: A Country Comparison Stephan Bundschuh

6.1  C  onceptual Understandings of Inclusive Society, Inclusion and Participation 6.1.1  Inclusive Society The term inclusive society refers to the structural composition of a society; it implies that inclusion is an issue which concerns all sections of society. In the Netherlands, in particular, inclusive society is organised through a participation society; this requires all citizens to actively participate in the labour market and in local decision-­ making processes. However, the obligation to play an active part puts the most vulnerable groups at risk of further exclusion as they are unable to comply with the norms of the participation society. For example, those on a low income may experience excluding inclusion; this means that although they are included in the labour market, their incomes are so low that this leads to precarity and to exclusion from other societal fields. In her dystopian novel GRM: Brainfuck, Sibylle Berg (2019) imagines a totally inclusive post-Brexit society in Britain. In a digital surveillance state, which provides people with a basic income, the population is under sedation from drugs and non-stop media consumption. Social work no longer exists and society is subject to continuous monitoring (Berg, 2019, p. 247). Governed by artificial intelligence, the overwhelming majority of the population accepts this repressive form of inclusive society. An emancipatory model of an inclusive society is the very opposite of such a dystopia. In an open and inclusive society, all citizens have the opportunity to S. Bundschuh (*) Faculty of Social Sciences, Koblenz University of Applied Sciences, Koblenz, Germany e-mail: [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 S. Bundschuh et al. (eds.), Ambivalences of Inclusion in Society and Social Work, European Social Work Education and Practice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55446-0_6

133

134

S. Bundschuh

p­ articipate in all areas of public life and in all social spheres at local and other levels. This implies an individual’s right to decide whether they wish to participate. This right to choose depends on trust in others and a belief in the capability of others to act not only on their own behalf but also for the benefit of all members of society; this approach assumes a respect for human and individual rights. In addition, state intervention in the form of affirmative action is necessary to eliminate or at least minimise inequalities in terms of factors such as (dis)ability, education and income hence ensuring that all citizens have the same opportunities to participate. A fully inclusive society respects all people, whatever their differences and vulnerabilities, and the right to inclusion does not depend on an individual’s ability to contribute to society; this contrasts with the idea of the participation society. The country chapters describe concepts of inclusive society and how these are implemented in different national contexts. In the Netherlands, the state has a prominent role in developing an inclusive society, whilst in Spain, the third sector plays an important part. In Croatia, the concept of inclusive society mainly applies to creating social spaces for people with disabilities. In Germany, however, this specific term is not used in the discourse on inclusion; with a focus on systems theory, inclusion and exclusion are regarded as interrelated elements in a modern differentiated society with subsystems. Inclusion may be precarious within a subsystem and inclusion in one system can lead to exclusion from another.

6.1.2  Inclusion: Agendas, Processes and Trajectories European and United Nations conventions on human rights have led to international discussions and the implementation of inclusive processes at a range of levels in society, the economy, education and social work. The research projects discussed in the country studies were conducted during a similar period; this is significant as approaches to inclusion have been influenced by these European and international agreements. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN CRPD) and various European Union (EU) strategies relating to equal rights are significant tools and have pushed forward inclusion processes in all of the four countries discussed in this book. Although interpretations differ, and the extent of implementation and scope of inclusion varies between and within the countries examined here, the importance of international initiatives for social progress is evident. Discussions on inclusion encompass many theoretical approaches, societal challenges, economic demands, and human hopes and desires. Inclusion can be defined as a catch-all term for diverse and sometimes controversial developments and issues in society and social work. Inclusion can be understood in terms of theory, conceptual frames, processes and results. As the country chapters show, the idea of inclusion is generally applied in a limited way, considering its theoretical and conceptual potential. Inclusion is often restricted to a few social domains (e.g., the education system) or to specific target groups (e.g., people with disabilities). However, the country

6  The Ambivalences of Inclusion in Society and Social Work: A Country Comparison

135

chapters refer to a wider range of interpretations in different contexts. Inclusion can be understood as: • a process initiated by the state with an emphasis on the participative element of inclusion (Netherlands). Here, inclusion functions as an aspect of organising society in a neoliberal economy; • a grassroots process, mainly implemented by non-profit organisations, which has emerged due to failures in social policy and inadequate provision of social care and social protection by both the public and private sectors (Spain); • a state initiative and an academic approach to deinstitutionalising social work (Croatia); • a reform process in education and social services (Germany); • a neutral term to break down the barriers created in the discourse on integration (Netherlands and Germany). All of the country chapters distinguish between the terms inclusion and integration; inclusion is sometimes understood as the next step after integration in a process of modernisation. In other cases, it is used as a less oppressive and less politically loaded alternative to the term integration, as well as to avoid the implications of a requirement to assimilate, which the concept of integration often signifies. For social work activists and non-profit organisations which support an inclusive approach, inclusion is always considered a normative aim; from this perspective, expanding and reinforcing inclusion in society leads to improved human rights, higher levels of political participation and economic inclusion, and increased social and cultural representation, particularly for social minorities and those who receive social work support. Inclusion is seen as an important social value which should be actively supported and encouraged. All areas of society are responsible for inclusion processes in the public, private and non-profit sectors, including within social work and education provision. Furthermore, utopian ideals in a positive sense are sometimes considered to be important influencing factors in the progress of inclusion (McMaster, 2013). Whilst in Croatia, the discussion surrounding inclusion is mainly focused on people with disabilities, in Germany, the inclusion debate also involves other social groups facing discrimination and marginalisation, such as people with a migrant background, women, young people or elderly citizens. In Spain, inclusion also relates to the challenges faced by many marginalised groups, from migrants to gay men. In the Netherlands, active participation by all citizens, regardless of their social background, is viewed as the key to an inclusive society.

6.1.3  Inclusion and/or Participation Discussions on inclusion and participation are closely linked in the four country chapters. However, the aim of inclusion is to ensure that all members of society are treated equally in terms of economics and politics, as well as legal, social and

136

S. Bundschuh

c­ ultural rights. Participation, on the other hand, involves all individuals making an active contribution to society and it can be viewed as an instrument to facilitate an inclusive society. In the Netherlands and Germany, the inclusion debate is accompanied by legislation and measures to activate marginalised groups. This legislation relies on the participation and self-reliance of citizens. In Croatia, discussions focus on participation as a necessary element of inclusion and democracy. Croatian society was and still is generally perceived as a monocultural society, so supporting participation as an active form of inclusion makes diversity more visible in society. In Spain, one of the main aims of social work—especially in non-profit organisations—is to establish and maintain the participation of vulnerable groups; in the case of homeless people in Barcelona, participation is supported by the public administration whereas for older gay men, social activism by lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) organisations plays a vital role. Current social work theories, such as the capability approach (Nussbaum, 2011; Otto & Schrödter, 2010; Tetzer, 2012) emphasise the power, capabilities and potential resources of social work clients. The capability approach is closely related to the concept of empowerment and to participation strategies (Clark, Biggeri, & Frediani, 2019); it is therefore no surprise that in all the country chapters, empowerment is identified as a significant resource-oriented method for supporting inclusive and participatory developments. Nevertheless, resource-oriented approaches can also lead to negative developments. Participation, for instance, risks being transformed from a right and an opportunity into a requirement and an obligation. In the Dutch chapter, this is referred to as the participation paradox; for example, in Germany and the Netherlands, a failure or refusal to participate adequately can lead to sanctions, such as a reduction in financial support. Whilst a requirement to participate was not raised as a specific issue in Spain or Croatia, the research discussed suggests that increased inclusion of minorities (e.g. of Roma migrant women in Catalonia or people with disabilities living in community settings in Croatia) frequently leads to greater social participation.

6.2  C  hanging Welfare Structures: From Integration to Inclusion Castel (2011) suggests that the social policy changes which have taken place in Europe since the 1970s should be described as a transformation rather than a disintegration of the welfare state (p. 187f and p. 192). He argues that the reorganisation of social work is a prototype for restructuring all forms of welfare state intervention in post-industrial societies; Castel (2011) describes this as a society of individuals, in reference to the theories of Norbert Elias (p. 21). This hypothesis is supported by the transformations of social care systems described in the country chapters. Rather than being diminished or eradicated, social care structures have been liberalised,

6  The Ambivalences of Inclusion in Society and Social Work: A Country Comparison

137

individualised and localised to make institutional structures more cost-effective and more flexible whilst also responding to the increasing diversity of service users.

6.2.1  Welfare State Transformation in Neoliberal Societies According to Wendy Brown (2015), in neoliberal societies every citizen is considered to be a homo oeconomicus and is included in the process of (re)producing society. No individual should be left behind or excluded, everyone is a part of the production of surplus value and profit. With reference to Foucault, Brown describes this development as a new governmental strategy. However, this can also be interpreted as the result of an intensification of instrumental reason (Habermas, 1984; Horkheimer, 1947; Weber, 1979/1922), along with the colonisation of the lifeworld (Habermas, 1987). According to these theories, all levels and members of society are included in the processes of production, consumption and maximising profits; only children and elderly people are exempt from the duty to contribute to the production process through the prohibition of child labour and the specification of legal retirement ages. However, the way children are raised and educated in early childhood can be understood as preparation for participation in labour and production processes. Furthermore, the promotion of lifelong learning can be interpreted as the duty of all members of society to prepare themselves for fulfilling useful roles at any time and in any situation. For instance, the extension of the legal retirement age in several European countries has been controversial and can be considered a call for elderly people to remain active until the end of their lives; it is a response to the increasing social burden of caring for an ageing population. Foster and Walker (2015) describe how, over the last two decades, ‘EU policy discourses on active ageing’ have been dominated by ‘a narrow productivist approach’, which focuses on ‘extending working life’ (p. 87). This productivist approach also affects younger people in a similar way; their social utility is evaluated on the basis of productivity and occupation; those who are unable to fulfil these requirements are hence vulnerable to precarity (Atzmüller, Hürtgen, & Krenn, 2015). In the post-World War II period, most European and Anglo-American countries developed some type of social welfare system, which included social work provision. Social work hence became institutionalised. Castel (2011) describes the welfare state as a social state or a state of growth (p. 182). As an institution, social work is linked to the development and transformation of the social state and was tasked with the (re)integration of marginalised social groups, such as the long-term unemployed or migrants. Between the post-war period and the 1970s, social work acted as a mediator between state institutions and marginalised individuals (Castel, 2011, pp. 182–187). During the 1970s and 1980s, the traditional social welfare state was gradually transformed into an economic, neoliberal, activating state. A number of new social movements also emerged during this period, including movements for peace, environmental protection, women’s rights, Sinti and Roma rights, and gay rights. These movements paved the way for greater individualisation, autonomy and

138

S. Bundschuh

diversity within societies. As described in the country chapters, across Europe the discussion and paradigm gradually shifted from integration to inclusion. Castel (2011) identifies the de-collectivisation and re-individualisation of labour regulations and social rights as central to welfare state transformation processes (p.  187). A new precariat emerged made up of new marginalised groups and the term new poverty was coined. Social services were restructured and tasked with the insertion of these marginalised groups to ensure a minimal form of economic and social inclusion. Responsibility for the implementation of social programmes was transferred to a local level as social service measures were decentralised (Castel, 2011, pp.  190–192). Castel’s description, which is based on the case of France, serves as an example and closely reflects the situations in Germany, Spain and the Netherlands. Due to the transformation process from socialism to capitalism and impact of the Balkan conflict in the 1990s, the circumstances in Croatia are more complex. Nevertheless, in the period after World War II, and during the economic, political and social crises of the 1980s and 1990s, the development pattern of the welfare state in the former Yugoslavia and Croatia was similar to that of Western European countries, despite the difference in economic systems.

6.2.2  D  ecentralising and Deinstitutionalising Social Welfare Structures The challenges faced in the process of decentralising and deinstitutionalising social welfare structures are closely linked to the issue of inclusion. At political and administrative levels, decentralisation means regionalising and municipalising welfare structures. In the Netherlands, this was a central focus of social welfare reforms and in Germany, inclusion dominated the debate surrounding changes in the allocation of local social work budgets (Sozialraumbudget). These developments represent an emphasis on individualising measures and strengthening community structures. The chapters on the Netherlands and Spain provide examples of how inclusion processes are largely developed by involving local communities, and by strengthening networks and community initiatives. Deinstitutionalising social welfare structures involves a range of measures, such as transferring special needs education from separate specialised schools to mainstream educational settings, or moving people with disabilities from children’s homes and care institutions into community-based residential settings. However, this challenge extends beyond the issue of accommodation and settings. In this new context, social workers are assigned with the task of enabling individuals to become more independent and able to support themselves; hence the process of deinstitutionalisation often involves contradictions and paradoxes. In Spain, non-profit organisations play a key role in helping excluded individuals and groups to gain access to public social services. The Spanish authors identified two reasons for this: insufficient provision of services by public social work ­institutions, and a combination of political activism and proximity of social care within the third sector. Positioned between formal institutions and informal activi-

6  The Ambivalences of Inclusion in Society and Social Work: A Country Comparison

139

ties, third sector initiatives and organisations are more flexible and more specialised than public administrations. These independent organisations are not bound by government restrictions; they provide professional advocacy for their clients, strengthen social awareness and support clients in accessing their social rights. Their use of activism and informal support networks also plays a key role. In Croatia, there have been differences in opinion between the state, social work academics and social welfare providers. The government wishes to privatise social services provision and reduce public funding. The academics argue that deinstitutionalisation is necessary to ensure that individualised measures can be implemented and that there is greater equality in social service provision by institutions; they see deinstitutionalisation as an essential element of establishing more inclusive and participative practices in social work. In contrast, social work institutions and professionals fear that the process of deinstitutionalisation will lead to their political devaluation resulting in divestment and a reduction in social measures. Together, the processes of inclusion and deinstitutionalisation have led to the consistent reform of traditional social work concepts and structures. In practice, inclusion means the closure of segregated institutions for isolated groups; Goffman (2009/1961) referred to these as total institutions (pp. 1–124). However, this is just one aspect of deinstitutionalisation; the wider aim is to replace monolithic, vertical welfare structures with pluralistic, horizontal structures, which are less directive. Since inclusion is associated with a strengthening of individual rights and capabilities, social work measures must be individualised accordingly and be adapted to clients’ individual needs and abilities. As described in the Croatian chapter, these changes have led to new social work practices, such as community-based services, foster families and small residential units. From the perspective of established social welfare providers, these changes have been met with concerns about a potential loss of influence and control, both in relation to policy makers and clients.

6.3  Social Work and Inclusion Processes The country studies presented in this book show that, despite the multifaceted nature of the debate surrounding inclusion, the points of reference are similar: these include the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the Global Definition of Social Work and various EU strategies, as described in Chap. 1. The promotion of social inclusion is one of the core mandates of social work in the Global Definition of Social Work (International Federation of Social Workers, 2014). Social work plays a vital role in the implementation and realisation of inclusive measures in the social sector in all four countries referred to in this book. Decentralisation and deinstitutionalisation processes have led to new social work approaches and methods. Whether inclusive societies develop as a result of top-­ down government initiatives or bottom-up third sector activities, political ­developments have an impact on social work. It is therefore essential to acknowledge the political mandate of social work.

140

S. Bundschuh

6.3.1  The Political Mandate of Social Work Social work is not generally viewed as a politics-related discipline or profession. Some social workers believe that the primary responsibility of this field should be to facilitate the social inclusion of vulnerable people by providing care, advice and support in their daily lives. As such, social workers sometimes regard their work as conflicting with political decisions; their aim is to support those in need, not to politicise them; hence the political mandate of social work sometimes conflicts with this understanding of its professional aim. On the other hand, social work is often considered a human rights profession, which makes it inherently political. Social workers have a duty to raise issues, share visions, call out injustices, connect stakeholders, and to bring together policy and practice. Whilst policy developments affect the social work profession, social workers can and should also influence how policy is developed. Community work is an example of this; raising political awareness within communities is often a key task for social workers. There is a strong connection between political activism and social work, in fact, some social work professionals are also activists. Furthermore, many NGOs combine political and social work by uniting political campaigning with the provision of legal advice and social support for marginalised groups. NGOs often have close links to social movements and have made significant contributions to social work developments, both in terms of policy and practice, particularly in relation to inclusive processes. Strategic alliances are of great importance to social movements and the third sector; such alliances increase the impact of organisations and promote equal participation. According to Foroutan (2019, pp. 198–209), the term alliance is used in contrast to solidarity and affiliation. Whilst the latter terms refer to an asymmetric allocation of power within a network, an alliance is structured more symmetrically and links partners as equal strategic players (Foroutan, 2019, p. 199); this is an important precondition for equal participation. To fully understand the debate surrounding the inclusion of people with disabilities, it is essential to recognise the significance of long-standing international campaigns by disabled rights groups for self-determination and autonomy—including equal rights, equal participation and equal education. Self-organised campaign groups have also played a vital role for other marginalised and vulnerable groups, such as women, LGBT people, the elderly, migrants, and Roma and Sinti communities. The country studies on Spain and Croatia provide clear examples of this; the Spanish research emphasises how the flexibility, proximity and specialist knowledge offered by third sector organisations contrasts with more rigid public sector structures. The third sector acts as a mediator between those in need of support and public social work institutions. The Croatian research highlights how the intense collaborations between national and international NGOs have pushed forward inclusion and deinstitutionalisation processes in society and social work.

6  The Ambivalences of Inclusion in Society and Social Work: A Country Comparison

141

6.3.2  Challenges for the Social Work Profession As a guiding principle, inclusion affects social workers’ professional understanding of their work and responsibilities. There have been many ambivalences in the change processes from industrialism to neoliberalism and from integration to inclusion; as a result, social workers have often had to adapt to uncertainty and accelerated social transformation (Rosa, 2013). These changes have not only had an impact on the lifeworlds of social work clients, but also on the professional knowledge and approaches of social workers. The country studies in this book offer valuable and thought-provoking insights into the social work profession and how it has responded to such changes. Faced with the significant challenge of responding to an expanding range of clients with a diversity of care needs, the research presented in the country studies provides several examples of how social workers have recognised their clients’ significance as experts on their lives and lifeworlds. Respecting clients’ self-reliance and autonomy enables social workers to co-create social work together with service users. In this way, social workers become facilitators, providing clients with the support they need to represent themselves, rather than simply acting on their behalf. Social workers are responsible for helping their clients to accumulate social and cultural capital (Bourdieu, 1986). In order to successfully accumulate social capital, individuals must be capable of making social contacts through networking; this strengthens their private and professional networks as well as their social environments. Cultural capital is accumulated through the ability to learn, the availability of leisure time and access to lifelong learning opportunities. Social workers function as activators or trainers for their clients. Furthermore, it is essential that social workers have access to ongoing skills development training to enable them to accommodate new types of clients and stakeholders, and to adapt to changes in working environments, regulations and client needs. Like their clients, social workers need to accumulate cultural capital by participating in further training. Similarly, professional networking is a key aspect as it enables social workers to accumulate professional social capital. In this sense, social workers and their clients are impacted by the same challenges and imperatives. In recent years, the social work profession has incorporated new roles and responsibilities in response to changes in society. Social workers frequently act as mediators and project managers whilst the traditional social work task of relationship building is often overshadowed by these new requirements. Social workers now receive training in skills such as flexibility, autonomy, self-awareness, self-­ promotion, self-reflection, self-efficacy, self-reliance and self-regulation; the individual self is a central focus for both social workers and their clients. Whilst Webb (2020) critiques this as a ‘culture of individualism in social work’ (p. 73), it is often an official requirement. In neoliberal societies, these individualisation processes, alongside the erosion of solidarity, have served both to emancipate and isolate social workers and clients alike. Social workers should be aware of this correlation and of the ambivalences of individualisation processes. As social work initiates and sup-

142

S. Bundschuh

ports social inclusion processes, it is also vital to bear in mind the potential pitfalls of individualisation. Strengthening private networks alone will not lead to a solidary society; hence there should be an emphasis on social work’s role in creating safety nets or establishing new social structures in more creative and less prescriptive ways.

6.3.3  Challenges for Social Work Research Three major challenges should be addressed with regard to the research projects discussed in the country chapters; these relate to the forms of research processes followed, the need for interdisciplinary research on inclusion and the requirements of participatory research on inclusion. The starting point for this project was to share perspectives on inclusive society based on the current situation in four European countries. The country chapters reconstruct the discussions on inclusion and inclusive societies with a specific focus on social work. Some of the research cited in the country studies was conducted by the chapter authors; the research results originate from a range of project formats, from quantitative and qualitative empirical studies to social work projects with accompanying research. Many of the research projects were part of doctoral research. There were also a range of organisational and funding structures for the research in our network. The Netherlands research team is based in Maastricht/Sittard and the research was conducted through Zuyd University of Applied Sciences; the university develops, coordinates and conducts a wide range of social work research. Based in Zagreb, the Croatian team consists of two social work professors and researchers with a particular interest in inclusion. The Spanish team is based in Barcelona and its research was mainly carried out through the social work research network Grupo de Investigación e Innovación en Trabajo Social (GRITS), which is recognised by the Catalonian Agency for Management of University and Research Grants (AGAUR); most of their projects were based on PhD research. The German team is based in Koblenz and their research was largely funded through external funds and supported by the Institute of Research and Further Education (IFW) in the Faculty of Social Sciences. Of these four research groups, only Lectoraat Sociale Integratie Zuyd at Zuyd University of Applied Sciences has an institutional research framework with research professorships and research posts. Furthermore, some of its research projects also received external funding. Whilst the IFW in Koblenz provides support for research projects initiated and implemented by professors at the university, including the German research team for this book, it does not currently conduct its own institutional research. The GRITS network in Barcelona brings together a large number of social work researchers in a network, although it is not a research institute in its own right. Its members are social work professionals who combine professional practice and scholarly research. The Department of Social Work at the University of Zagreb does not generally have defined research groups and research practice is not structured within organisations. Researchers have the freedom to pursue their own research and establish research teams for particular projects.

6  The Ambivalences of Inclusion in Society and Social Work: A Country Comparison

143

The research methods and results presented in the country studies were in some cases organised according to a range of criteria, such as social theories (Barcelona) or funding provision (Koblenz). All the research groups support the further development and expansion of theoretical and empirical social work research on inclusion. Research topics are frequently influenced by external factors, such as funding opportunities or local issues, rather than consistent research programmes based on specific theoretical or thematic frameworks. Developing a common approach towards comparative analysis and research on inclusion in different European countries would be a further move towards advancing inclusion. Whilst the specific research on inclusion processes discussed in this book has been viewed through lens of particular social groups, there has also been a great deal of general reflection on inclusion. The country chapters incorporate multiple approaches—inductive and deductive, field-oriented and theoretical—as well as considering the political discourse surrounding inclusion. Research in the fields of social work and inclusive society should seek to expand this multilevel, interdisciplinary approach in the future. This project involved interdisciplinary research teams with authors from the following disciplines: social work, sociology, political sciences, psychology, philosophy, anthropology, law and education. This diversity is characteristic of the social work discipline and profession, and enables a wide understanding of the issues surrounding inclusion. Furthermore, this draws attention to the social significance of inclusion in specific fields of social work and for particular target groups. The country chapters address a range of issues and challenges relating to inclusive societies and inclusive processes in specific contexts, such as education or care. Interdisciplinary research teams are essential to carrying out multi-perspective research and providing interdisciplinary interpretations of results. Although the social work discipline is sometimes chided for its diverse and interdisciplinary nature, these particular characteristics are advantageous to research on inclusion. However, such research must also show that its approach is truly inclusive; social work research has a long tradition of applying methodologies which include service users; participation in such research processes can activate and empower social work clients. Participatory research, which was first initiated by Kurt Lewin (1946) and referred to as action research, is still an important, multifaceted approach (Unger, 2014, pp.  13–34). Whilst the extent of participant involvement varies greatly, current participatory social work still follows Lewin’s argument that ‘we should consider action, research and training as a triangle that should be kept together’ (Lewin, 1946, p. 42). This approach is a critique of the binary structure of traditional scientific research, which strictly distinguishes between the researcher and the research object. In contrast, participatory social work research includes target group representatives as participants in the research process by involving them in the design and implementation of research methods, and in the interpretation and evaluation of research data. This is often a stipulation for qualitative empirical research (Bergold & Thomas, 2012a, 2012b) although levels of participation may differ considerably.

144

S. Bundschuh

The research presented in the country chapters illustrates a range of approaches; whilst the extent to which target groups were involved varied, all the research projects had the same aim: to positively influence social work practice and empower social work clients through research-based reflections on the social work profession. The next step for our research network will be to develop a common research approach and a shared understanding of inclusionary and participatory aspects of research processes. In the field of social work, participatory research seems particularly relevant; this discipline and profession deals with the most vulnerable individuals and groups in society and hence has an inherent responsibility to protect them from harm and abuse. Participatory research should therefore be further expanded and developed.

6.4  The Future of Inclusion Although there are many scenarios which could impact on the future developments of inclusion, we have identified two distinct areas which seem particularly significant to society and social work in a European context. The first is the ongoing debate on approaches to inclusion. There are three main standpoints: (1) those who support the fundamental concept of inclusion, (2) those who endorse a pragmatic inclusion programme and (3) those who advocate an excluding inclusion. In a political context, this is reflected in the opposition between advocates of an open, diverse, pluralistic and inclusive society (standpoint 1 and 2), and proponents of a return to closed national welfare societies, such as those established across Europe in the 1950s (standpoint 3). In the field of social work, this is reflected in the opposition between supporters of the consistent inclusion of vulnerable people in mainstream institutions (standpoint 1) and advocates of the moderate use of specialised institutions, particularly for people with disabilities (standpoint 2). It is important to distinguish between these political and social debates. In the social debate, support for a pragmatic position (standpoint 2) is motivated by scientific knowledge and practical experience; however, the political arguments for restricting inclusion are motivated by anti-modern ideological attitudes (standpoint 3). The second significant aspect discussed in relation to the future of inclusion is Eric Olin Wright’s (2010, 2011) concept of a real utopia, which has been used to understand the reality of partial inclusion and its significance in creating an inclusive society.

6.4.1  Fundamental, Pragmatic and Excluding Inclusion The fundamental concept of an inclusive society applies not only to welfare system structures, but also to other areas of society. Each of the country chapters raises broader issues about inclusive processes, which extend beyond the social field. In the Netherlands, for instance, the participation of elderly citizens also relates to the

6  The Ambivalences of Inclusion in Society and Social Work: A Country Comparison

145

labour market and pension system; it raises questions regarding paid employment and voluntary work. In Spain, the important role of self-advocacy groups in building trust opens up the issue of boundaries between semi-professional, professional and volunteer work. In addition, inclusive citizenship is considered fundamental to a pluralistic society in which the fundamental rights of all people should be recognised. The German chapter considers how post-migrant society widens social perspectives through the normalisation of diversity. The Croatian chapter describes how expectations of the education system have expanded and social responsibilities have been redefined to encompass full inclusion. Inclusion has political, moral and social dimensions; it has the potential to ensure equal opportunities and equality for all members of society in all future social systems. However, these forward-looking objectives are challenged by nationalistic and right-wing ideologies, which reject the idea of an inclusive society. There is ideological polarisation between and within European countries. Right-wing populism, which has been described as an excluding anti-establishment protest (Priester, 2016, p. 546), demands political and social participation for local people only. Nationalist political parties have campaigned with slogans such as The Netherlands for us again! (Nederland weer van ons!, Partij voor de vrijheid, n.d.), Make Spain great again (Hacer España grande otra vez, Vox, 2016) or Human rights for Germans too (Menschenrechte auch für Deutsche, Alternative für Deutschland Landesverband Sachsen, n.d.). Although there is not currently an equivalent right-wing party in Croatia, a new conservative anti-migration movement is also emerging. Right-wing populism is guided by the ideal of an exclusive solidarity (Koppetsch, 2019, p.  50). For example, the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) party strongly opposes diversity and inclusion. In its Manifesto for Germany, the party explicitly states that ‘assimilation as the most advanced form of integration is worth striving for, yet, it cannot be enforced’ (AfD, 2016, p. 62). It entirely rejects ‘the ideological concept of inclusion’ and ‘supports the continued existence of special schools for children with disabilities and learning difficulties’ (AfD, 2016, p. 53). Whilst progressive, post-migration discourse is looking beyond the term integration towards inclusion, the retrogressive identity-based politics of conservative and far-right parties aspire to regressive assimilation practices. A consistent inclusion process implies the closure of all specialised institutions for vulnerable groups; however, there is disagreement on this in the inclusion discourse. The arguments for and against maintaining institutions such as special schools vary between countries. Some argue that specialised institutions provide the best possible support for users with specific needs. Others claim that such institutions lead to segregation and seek to hide vulnerable groups from the rest of society; they argue that opening up all mainstream institutions to inclusive processes will lead to greater awareness of and sensibility to special needs and support methods, both amongst professionals and in society as a whole. As demonstrated in the German and Dutch chapters, inclusion does not and should not mean that special needs are neglected; the form of care should change from separate, institutionalised support to assistance which is more innovative, flexible and individualised. In the German chapter, the concept of the least restrictive environment is considered a

146

S. Bundschuh

guideline for assessing each individual case and establishing the support needed for each individual in an institution. This concept could provide a solution which is a compromise between the fundamental and pragmatic inclusion approaches.

6.4.2  Inclusion as a Real Utopia Although the country chapters demonstrate different approaches to social work, the common cross-sectional aim is to achieve inclusion and establish inclusive societies. The Dutch authors describe a top-down government process, which attempts to implement inclusive principles in social care and, consequently, in social work practice. The Spanish authors detail the relationships between successful social inclusion, participation, inclusive citizenship and political affiliations. They emphasise the importance of non-governmental organisations in social work; full inclusion— rather than symbolic participation—is described as a necessary bottom-up process and is supported by the third sector due to failures in public social services. The Croatian authors describe a different trend: the inclusion discourse, which influences social work practice in Croatia, has a strong academic basis and public social work institutions fear that this discourse will put their jobs and way of working at risk. Finally, in Germany, social work is characterised by robust public sector provision, which is supported by a strong third sector and an active civil society, which is sometimes funded by the state at a local or federal level. In a German context, the term inclusion is used to refer to strategies for facilitating accessibility for different social issues, such as disability or migration. Despite these differences, the four country studies also reveal several common factors. Whilst inclusive society has not yet been fully realised in any of these countries, there have been important steps towards including all citizens in society. These processes are ongoing and are often ambivalent. The potential of a truly inclusive society could be described as a real utopia (Wright, 2010, 2011); however, this has not yet been achieved. Wright refers to examples of real utopias in new solidarity movements, such as cooperatives, open source projects and participative urban assemblies, although such movements are not currently dominant in society. He defines real utopias as follows: The utopia in ‘real utopia’ means thinking about alternatives to dominant institutions in ways that embody our deepest aspirations for a just and human world. This is fundamentally a moral issue: figuring out the moral standards by which institutions should be judged and exploring how alternative institutional arrangements might more fully realise those values. The real in ‘real utopia’ also explores alternatives to dominant institutions, but focuses on problems of unintended consequences and self-destructive dynamics. What we need are clear-headed, rigorous models of viable alternatives to existing social institutions that both embody our deepest aspirations for human flourishing and also take seriously the problem of the practical design of workable institutions – and thus are attentive to what it takes to bring those aspirations to the real world (Wright, 2011).

6  The Ambivalences of Inclusion in Society and Social Work: A Country Comparison

147

Furthermore, Wright (2011) considers existing social settings which ‘violate the basic logics of dominant institutions in ways that embody emancipatory aspirations and prefigure broader utopian alternatives.’ He describes the role of research as to establish how such settings function and to identify how they ‘facilitate human flourishing; to analyse their limitations, dilemmas and unintended consequences; and to understand ways of developing their potentials and enlarging their reach’ (Wright, 2011). This description of a real utopia closely reflects the aims of current reality of some successful inclusion processes which have been realised at a local or field-­ specific level. At national levels, however, there is still a long way to go. In the debates on inclusion in the four countries discussed in this book, progress has often been slowed by the interweaving of dominant and underlying discourses on controversial issues, such as top-down and bottom-up processes, or strategies based on emancipation/solidarity or authoritarianism/individualisation. Each of the country studies reveals examples of controversial ideologies and trends within the framework of inclusion and inclusive society. Social work is at a crossroads; one path leads to attempts to make social work clients fit the utility required by society as a whole; it is clear that not all clients will be able to fulfil these requirements. This path represents social work as a disciplining agency of the state in conflict with the needs of individuals. The other path involves using social work as a tool to support and empower people in dealing with the demand for utility in capitalist systems; it supports people’s right to exist without being required to fulfil particular roles. This is a path towards an inclusive, plural society in which all individuals can live in their own way without being separated or distanced from their communities or society. Social work in Europe is still at the beginning of its journey towards full inclusion and it should follow the second of these two paths. By continuing to strive for the modernisation of old principles, social workers can influence practice and policy, and facilitate progress towards inclusive societies in the future. Acknowledgements  I wish to thank Maria José Freitas, Esra Herzog, Jana Kluge-Wirz, María Virginia Matulic Domandzic, Ana Opačić and Càndid Palacín Bartrolí for their comments to this chapter.

References Alternative für Deutschland (2016). Manifesto for Germany. The political programme of the Alternative for Germany. Retrieved March 8, 2020, from https://www.afd.de/wp-content/ uploads/sites/111/2017/04/2017-04-12_afd-grundsatzprogramm-englisch_web.pdf Alternative für Deutschland Landesverband Sachsen (n.d.). Official website. Retrieved March 24, 2020, from https://www.afdsachsen.de/ Atzmüller, R., Hürtgen, S., & Krenn, M. (2015). Die zeitgemäße Arbeitskraft. Qualifiziert, aktiviert, polarisiert. Weinheim: Beltz Juventa. Berg, S. (2019). GRM: Brainfuck (3rd ed.). Köln: Kiepenheuer & Witsch.

148

S. Bundschuh

Bergold, J., & Thomas, S. (2012a). Participatory research methods: A methodological approach in motion. Forum Qualitative Social Research, 13(1). Retrieved March 8, 2020, from http://www. qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1801/3334 Bergold, J., & Thomas, S. (Eds.). (2012b). Participatory qualitative research. Forum Qualitative Social Research, 13(1). Retrieved March 8, 2020, from http://www.qualitative-research.net/ index.php/fqs/issue/view/39 Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp.  241–258). Westport, CT: Greenwood. Retrieved March 8, 2020, from http://www.socialcapitalgateway.org/sites/socialcapitalgateway.org/files/data/ paper/2016/10/18/rbasicsbourdieu1986-theformsofcapital.pdf Brown, W. (2015). Undoing the demos: Neoliberalism’s stealth revolution. New York: Zone Books. Castel, R. (2011). Die Krise der Arbeit. Neue Unsicherheiten und die Zukunft des Individuums. Hamburg: Hamburger Edition. Clark, D. A., Biggeri, M., & Frediani, A. A. (Eds.). (2019). The capability approach, empowerment and participation. Concepts, methods and applications. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Foroutan, N. (2019). Die postmigrantische Gesellschaft. Ein Versprechen der pluralen Demokratie. Bielefeld: Transcript. Foster, L., & Walker, A. (2015). Active and successful aging: A European policy perspective. The Gerontologist, 55(1), 83–90. Retrieved March 8, 2020, from https://academic.oup.com/ gerontologist/article/55/1/83/570558 Goffman, E. (2009/1961). Asylums. Essays on the social situation of mental patients and other inmates. New Brunswick: Aldine Transaction. Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action. Vol. I: Reason and the rationalization of society. Boston: Beacon. Habermas, J. (1987). The theory of communicative action. Vol. II: Lifeworld and system. Boston: Beacon. Horkheimer, M. (1947). Eclipse of reason. New York: Oxford University Press. International Federation of Social Workers (2014). Global definition of social work. Retrieved March 8, 2020, from https://www.ifsw.org/what-is-social-work/global-definition-of-social-work/ Koppetsch, C. (2019). Die Gesellschaft des Zorns. Rechtspopulismus im globalen Zeitalter. Bielefeld: Transcript. Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems. Journal of Social Issues, 2(4), 34–46. McMaster, C. (2013). Setting sail for that country. The utopian urge behind inclusion. International Journal of Whole Schooling, 9(2), 25–38. Retrieved March 8, 2020, from https://files.eric. ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1016790.pdf Nussbaum, M. C. (2011). Creating capabilities. The human development approach. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Otto, H.-U., & Schrödter, M. (2010). ‚Kompetenzen’ oder ‚Capabilities’ als Grundbegriffe einer kritischen Bildungsforschung und Bildungspolitik? In H.-H. Krüger, U. Rabe-Kleberg, R.-T.  Kramer, & J.  Budde (Eds.), Bildungsungleichheit Revisited. Bildung und Soziale Ungleichheit vom Kindergarten bis zur Hochschule (pp. 163–183). Wiesbaden: VS-Verlag. Partij voor de Vrijheid (n.d.). Nederland Weer Van Ons! Retrieved March 24, 2020, from https:// www.pvv.nl/nederland-weer-van-ons.html Priester, K. (2016). Rechtspopulismus – ein umstrittenes theoretisches und politisches Phänomen. In F. Virchow, M. Langebach, & A. Häusler (Eds.), Handbuch Rechtsextremismus (pp. 533– 560). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Rosa, H. (2013). Social acceleration. A new theory of modernity. New York: Columbia University Press. Tetzer, M. (2012). Sozialpädagogische Theorieperspektiven und der Capabilities Approach. In M. Schmid, M. Tetzer, K. Rensch, & S. Schlüter-Müller (Eds.), Handbuch Psychiatriebezogene Sozialpädagogik (pp. 58–77). Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. Unger, H. v. (2014). Partizipative Forschung. Einführung in die Forschungspraxis. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

6  The Ambivalences of Inclusion in Society and Social Work: A Country Comparison

149

Vox (2016). Hacer España Grande Otra Vez (Video). Retrieved March 24, 2020, from https://www. facebook.com/vox.espana/videos/hacer-espa%C3%B1a-grande-otra-vez/840288002743289/ Webb, S. A. (2020). European individualism and social work. In F. Kessl, W. Lorenz, H.-U. Otto, & S.  White (Eds.), European social work  – A compendium (pp.  63–82). Opladen: Barbara Budrich. Weber, M. (1979/1922). Economy and society. An outline of interpretive sociology. Berkeley: University of California Press. Wright, E. O. (2010). Envisioning real utopias. London: Verso. Wright, E. O. (2011). Real utopias for a globalized sociology. Global Dialogue. Magazine of the International Sociological Association, 2(5). Retrieved March 8, 2020, from http://globaldialogue.isa-sociology.org/real-utopias-for-a-global-sociology/

Country-Specific Concepts and Laws

The Netherlands Care Capacity Monitor (Zorgkrachtmonitor): An instrument to support local policymakers in measuring informal care and social networks in neighbourhoods. Civic Integration Law 2007 (Wet Inburgering 2007): The law which requires non-EU nationals who wish to live in the Netherlands long-term to pass a citizenship test. Kitchen table talk (keukentafelgesprek): A meeting with a representative from the municipality which takes place in a citizen’s home. The purpose of the meeting is to assess an individual’s need for municipal support to live at home. Newcomers Integration Law 1998 (Wet Inburgering Nieuwkomers 1998): The law obliging newcomers to participate in an integration programme to prepare them for becoming a part of Dutch society. Participation Act (Participatiewet 2015): The national policy established to support the participation of Dutch citizens (in the labour market). It is predominantly aimed at people who are unemployed but are capable of working, e.g., people with learning or developmental difficulties. Social district team (wijkteam): A group of social professionals from different professional and organisational backgrounds in municipalities. These teams organise care and social support in neighbourhoods and districts. Social Support Council (Wmo-raad): A forum where citizens and local interest groups contribute to the municipal policymaking process. Social Support Act (Wet Maatschappelijke Ondersteuning): The national policymaking municipalities responsible for organising social support. The law centres on enabling people to live autonomously in their own home and calls upon individual citizens and their (informal) social networks to act as the starting point for care and support.

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 S. Bundschuh et al. (eds.), Ambivalences of Inclusion in Society and Social Work, European Social Work Education and Practice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55446-0

151

152

Country-Specific Concepts and Laws

The social domain (het sociaal domein): A cluster of local practitioners, such as health and social care providers, as well as schools, volunteers, active citizens and civil society groups, who work with local government to develop, implement and evaluate care and social support services. Youth Care Act 2015 (Jeugdwet 2015): The national policy placing responsibility for youth care with municipalities. This includes specialised care, prevention, support and stimulating social networks.

Spain Law 12/2007 on social services in Catalonia (Llei 12/2007, d’11 d’octubre, de Serveis Socials): This law recognises the universal right to social service support and consolidates the functions of social services in Catalonia. The purpose of this law is to regulate and structure the social services system (public and private) in Catalonia. The Public Social Services System (SPSS) is set up through the Public Care Social Services Network, which was established in the social services portfolio with the aim of responding to social needs. The portfolio includes publicly and privately owned resources, equipment, projects, and programmes. The SPSS is governed by the following principles: universality, equality, public responsibility, solidarity, civic participation, globality, subsidiarity, prevention, community scope, promotion of social cohesion, normalisation, coordination, personalised and comprehensive care, respect for human rights, promotion of personal autonomy, economy, efficiency and effectiveness, and quality and continuity of services. Services are structured in two parts: Basic Social Services (SSB), which are multi-purpose in nature and are based on municipal competence, and Specialised Social Services (SSE), which support individuals and groups requiring specialised care. SSEs are provided through centres, services, programmes and resources aimed at particular groups and are funded by the responsible entity or administration. SSBs, on the other hand, are jointly financed by city councils and the Government of Catalonia. The law specifies the Strategic Plan for Social Services as the tool for planning, coordinating and implementing the measures, resources and actions required to achieve social services policy objectives in Catalonia. This plan is valid for 4 years and is implemented through sectoral plans, which may be valid for several years. Organic Law 4/2000 on the rights and freedoms of foreigners in Spain and their social integration (Ley Orgánica 4/2000, de 11 de enero, sobre derechos y libertades de los extranjeros en España y su integración social): This law specifies who is considered a foreigner and defines migration policy, integration of immigrants, the rights and freedoms of foreigners living in Spain, family reunification requirements and controls on entering Spanish territory. The law defines types of visa, residence permits, requirements for foreign students, conditions for residence and employment, and the situation of unaccompanied migrant minors. Furthermore, it regulates on infringements, sanctions and expulsions from the territory. The first

Country-Specific Concepts and Laws

153

draft of this law guaranteed certain social rights regardless of an individual’s registration status; these included rights to registration, health care, education and non-­ contributory benefits. However, substantial changes have been made to the law over the years, mainly due to changes in political policies. One of the most significant changes was made in 2012 as a result of the economic crisis: migrants with irregular status were no longer entitled to health care. The law became a tool for controlling the flow of migration and it established categories of migrant status which determine whether or not a migrant has access to certain rights. Royal Legislative Decree 1/2013 approving the Revised Law on the rights of persons with disabilities and their social inclusion (Real Decreto Legislativo 1/2013, por el que se aprueba el Texto Refundido de la Ley General de derechos de las personas con discapacidad y de su inclusión social): This decree, which has the same status as a law, maintains the spirit of a very innovative law which was approved in 1982 and aimed to facilitate the social integration of people with disabilities. The decree reinforced the initial law, as well as two additional laws approved in 2003 and 2007. The principal objectives of the decree were to guarantee the right to equal opportunities, equal treatment and autonomy, and to ensure that people with disabilities are able to exercise their rights in the same way as other citizens. Furthermore, its aims were to guarantee universal access to services and employment, inclusion in the community and independent living, as well as to eradicate all forms of discrimination. Whilst this and the earlier laws have served as valuable tools in the fight for the rights of people with disabilities, a great deal of work is still needed to enable full integration. Law 11/2014 on the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex people and the eradication of homophobia, biphobia and transphobia in Catalonia (Ley 11/2014, de 10 de octubre, para garantizar los derechos de lesbianas, gays, bisexuales, transgéneros e intersexuales y para erradicar la homofobia, la bifobia y la transfobia): The main purpose of the law was to expand and guarantee the rights and freedoms of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) people and to prevent discrimination and violence against them. One of the law’s objectives was to promote studies that gather and provide accurate data on these groups and monitor data collection. The reforms in this law also covered the following areas: education, culture, sports and leisure, the media, health, social services, occupations and working conditions, cooperation projects, recognition of family heterogeneity, the right to equal treatment, legal protection and the legitimacy of defending the right to equality, the right to access (to leisure facilities, entertainment venues, etc.), the right to recognition and to receive comprehensive protection, care and support from public institutions and support systems, the creation of specialised services, and a system of infringements and penalties. Law 13/2005 amending the Civil Code on the right to marry (Ley 13/2005, de 1 de julio, por la que se modifica el Código Civil en materia de derecho a contraer matrimonio): This law allows individuals to develop their personality and rights under equal conditions regardless of their sexual orientation. The laws on marriage should reflect the reality of Spanish society and the rights of all groups to full equality, whatever their sexual orientation. This requires a framework of rights and

154

Country-Specific Concepts and Laws

o­ bligations for formalising relationships. Articles of the Civil Code that refer to marriage were adapted and a set of rules which refer explicitly to the gender of individuals were added. The terms husband and wife were replaced with spouse or married partner. This new wording in article 44 of the Civil Code legally applies, regardless of whether those marrying are of the same or different genders. Furthermore, all references to marriage in the legal system must be understood to apply to same-sex or opposite-sex marriages.

Croatia Social welfare system (Sustav socijalne skrbi): The common term for the centralised, vertical system that provides social welfare in Croatia. The Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare is at the top of the hierarchy, whilst centres for social welfare and social welfare homes provide services and support to citizens. Inclusion (Inkluzija): The term commonly used in relation to inclusive education in Croatia; however, it also refers to community-based supported housing for people with intellectual disabilities. Joint Memorandum on Social Inclusion in the Republic of Croatia (Zajednički memorandum o socijalnom uključivanju Republike Hrvatske): The first national social inclusion strategy, which was based on the European Union Accession Partnership with Croatia. School for life (Škola za život): The current reforms of the Croatian primary and secondary education system. Social welfare centres (Centri za socijalnu skrb): Crucial locally based, government-­run institutions; these are the first contact points for a range of social issues, such as poverty, disability, youth delinquency and domestic violence. There are 135 centres and branch offices in Croatia. Social welfare institution (Ustanova socijalne skrbi): The term refers to all authorities involved in social welfare; these include social welfare centres, social care homes, small family-owned social care homes, centres for community-based services and centres providing in-house support. Social Care Act (Zakon o socijalnoj skrbi): The fundamental law relating to the social welfare system, social services and social rights in Croatia.

Germany Disability Equality Act (Behindertengleichstellungsgesetz): The 2002 law which prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities and enables them to participate in society in an equal and self-determined way. General Equal Treatment Act (Allgemeines Gleichbehandlungsgesetz): The 2006 law which implemented four different European anti-discrimination directives. The

Country-Specific Concepts and Laws

155

aim of the law was to eradicate discrimination based on race, gender, religion or beliefs, disability, age, or sexual identity. This has led to legal claims against employers, landlords and service providers. Right to options and choices (Wunsch- und Wahlrechte): People with disabilities have the right for their wishes to be considered with regard to the choice and implementation of rehabilitation and participation. An individual’s life situation and specific needs must be considered and self-reliance should be strengthened. Social Welfare Act or Social Code (Sozialgesetzbuch, Sozialrecht): The Social Welfare Act is the formal codification of social legislation in Germany; it consists of 12 different volumes. Volume Eight of the Social Code (Sozialgesetzbuch Achtes Buch: Kinder- und Jugendhilfe): This is generally referred to as the Child and Youth Welfare Act (Kinder- und Jugendhilfegesetz). This volume comprises the most important federal legal regulations on child and youth services in Germany. It regulates the cooperation of youth welfare offices and third sector agencies for child and youth welfare. The basic requirements are defined as promoting young people in their individual and social development, supporting and counselling parents and legal guardians, protecting children and young people from danger, and contributing to a positive environment for children, young people and their families. Volume Nine of the Social Code (Sozialgesetzbuch Neuntes Buch: Rehabilitation und Teilhabe von Menschen mit Behinderungen): This volume of the Social Code contains the regulations concerning the rehabilitation and participation of people with disabilities. The aim is to provide benefits to support self-determination and social participation, and to counteract discrimination. Volume Twelve of the Social Code (Sozialgesetzbuch Zwölftes Buch, Sozialhilfe): This volume of the German Social Code regulates social support/state benefits for people who are unable to support their own needs over a short or longer period of time. There are a diverse range of reasons for this, such as medical conditions, care needs or a low pension. The basic principle is capacity building and the aim is to ensure decent living standards for everyone.

Index

A Action research, 143 Addiction problems, 105 Adults and children with disabilities classes, 76 deinstitutionalisation, 76, 77 inclusion principles, 77 inclusive education, 77–81 mainstream education system, 77 poverty and economic deprivation, 76 social agenda, 77 stigmatisation, 76 support systems, 76 Affiliation, 140 Age-related welfare payments, 108 AIDS crisis, 58 Alliance, 140 Alternative für Deutschland (AfD), 145 Anamorphosis, 91 Anti-gypsyism, 56 Anti-psychiatric movement, 87 Artificial intelligence, 133 Assessment models, 80 Assistive technology, 113 Association for Promoting Inclusion, 92 Association for Self-Advocacy, 92 Attachment, 55 Authoritarianism/individualisation, 147 Autonomy, 34, 141 Average population, 86

B Balkan conflict, 138 Barcelona’s social entities, 59 Barcelonian disadvantaged groups gay men, 51 homelessness, 50 migrants, 50, 51 Roma migrant women, 51, 52 social links, 55–56 social participation, 58–60 stigmatisation and rejection, 55–56 theoretical frameworks affiliations, 53–55 collectives, 52 comparing research categories, 52 Blindness, 113–115 Bottom-up research instruments, 29–32 Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge (BAMF), 116 C Capability approach, 136 Capacity-building plans, 90 Care and benevolence, 101 Care capacity, 29 Care Capacity Monitor, 28, 29, 31 Care provision issues, 118, 119 Case management, 107, 108, 110 approach, 108 processes, 110 Castel’s description, 138

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 S. Bundschuh et al. (eds.), Ambivalences of Inclusion in Society and Social Work, European Social Work Education and Practice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55446-0

157

Index

158 Catalonia and Spain inclusive society challenges, 46–47 disadvantaged groups (see Barcelonian disadvantaged groups) social exclusion, 43–44 social inclusion, 45, 46 social inequality, 43–44 Third Sector and NGOs, 47–49 Catalonian Agency for Management of University and Research Grants (AGAUR), 142 Cheaper solution, 87 Child and Youth Welfare Act, 123–125 Children blindness, 113–115 visual impairments, 113–115 Child welfare and housing, 98 Citizens’ initiatives, 58 Civic Integration Law, 2007, 15 Civil rights movement, 85 Civil society, 117 Civil society organisations, 93 Clients’ life quality, 109 Community-based residential settings, 138 Community-based services, 93, 139 Community-based youth centres, 112 Community health centres (CAPs), 62, 64 Community networks, 56 Community work, 140 Comprehensive social and proactive support, 53 Comprehensive solution, 123–125 Compulsory education, 99 Contract workers, 116 Council for Sustainable Development, Government of Catalonia (CADS), 47 Counselling, 88 Critical life events, 107 Croatia, 134 community development, 4 deinstitutionalisation, 2, 3 inclusive society, 1, 2, 5 participation, 3 post-socialist transformation process, 9 users’ self-management, 4 Croatia inclusive society adults/children with disabilities (see Adults and children with disabilities) children with disabilities, 73 complexity of poverty, 74 Croatian social work, 74

deinstitutionalisation (see Deinstitutionalisation process) epistemological/ethical potential, 73 inclusion, 73 national framework context, 74 parallel process, 73 social agendas, 73 social inclusion, 73 Croatian social welfare system, 75 Croatian social work, 74 Culture-specific approaches, 119 Culture-specific services risk, 119 D Debates Child and Youth Welfare Act, 123–125 least restrictive environment, 122, 123 Debureaucratising social care schemes, 63 Decentralisation, 139 Decentralised service delivery, 91 Decentralised social care, 2 Decentralising, 138, 139 De-hospitalisation, 86 Deinstitutionalisation, 2, 3, 9, 101, 139 Deinstitutionalisation process achievements and obstacles, 87–91 average population, 86 civil rights movement, 85 description, 84 efforts, 88 hospitalisation and regionalisation, 86 human rights, 85 implementation levels, 84 inclusion concept, 86 inclusive education, 93 individualisation, 86 intellectual disabilities, 85 international momentum, 85 protective legislation, 85 self-advocacy movement, 86 social integration and normalisation, 86 social model, 86 social policy reforms, 85 social work’s contribution, 92 Deinstitutionalising social welfare structures, 138, 139 Demand-driven financial mechanism, 90 Democratic society, 103 Department of Social Work at the University of Barcelona, 50, 51 Developmental/emotional disorders, 121

Index Dichotomy, 61 Digital surveillance state, 133 Disability, 97, 98, 101–103, 135 children, 113–115 empirical data, 111–112 Disability Equality Act, 102 Disaffiliation, 55 Discrimination, 57, 121 Distress, 8 Dominant culture, 103 Dualism, 87 Dutch integration policy, 15 Dutch participation society active elderly citizens ageing, population, 24 local politicians, 25 Netherlands, 24, 25 policy, 25 policymakers, 25 social welfare projects, 25 social workers, 25–27 society, 25 system(s) perspective, 25, 26 community development, 20 elderly volunteers, 37 local authorities, 37 neighbourhoods (see Neighbourhoods) participation paradox, 20 policymakers, 37 political jargon, 37 social district teams (see Social district teams) social domain professionals, 20 social policy, 36 social workers, 37 young mothers social support systems, 21, 22 social work professionals’ support, 22–24 Dutch social workers, 14 Dutch welfare system, 9 Dystopian novel, 133 E Economics and politics, 135 situation, 53 Education and disability (see Disability) and migration, 119, 120 Educational inclusion, 120 Educational issues, 121

159 Educational specialists, 120 Elderly citizens, 27 Elderly volunteers, 27, 37 Emancipation/solidarity, 147 Emancipatory model, 133 Empirical data, 111–112 Empowerment, 136 Entitats Catalanes d’Acció Social (ECAS), 48 EU policy discourses, 137 European Anti-Poverty Network Spain (EAPN-ES), 48 European Association of Schools of Social Work (EASSW), 1 European Commission, 6, 7 European comparison, 134, 137, 138, 142–145 European Economic Community, 6 European Platform against Poverty and Social Exclusion (EPAPSE), 7 European Policy, 6, 7 European poverty prevention plans, 6 Excluding inclusion, 133, 144–146 Exclusion administration, 100 factors, 110 heroin users, 107–110 management, 100 prevention, 100 Expert group (GD), 60 F Facilitating inclusion, 104 Family-based services, 90 Family support networks, 55 Federal Ministry of Research and Education, 108 Federal Republic of Germany (FRG), 116 Federal Statistical Office, 115 First-generation migrants, 118 Flexibility, 141 Foreign migrants, 116 Foreignness, 118 Formal associative structures, 54 Formal education institutions, 80 Function systems, 99 Fundamental inclusion, 144–146 G Gay support associations, 59 Gender equality, 46 Gender-sensitive assistance, 105 General Equal Treatment Act, 102

160 General social framework, 79 German Democratic Republic (GDR), 116 German education system, 111 German social welfare system, 112 German welfare system, 97, 98 Germany inclusive society, 1, 3 integration, 3 Luhmann’s social systems theory, 10 participation, 3 practice-based project, 5 research-based projects, 5 social work, 4 Gerontological disciplines, 54 Gerontological services, 54, 59 Globalisation, 44 Government institutions, 94 Grassroots process, 135 GRITS ( Research and Innovation Group in Social Work), 142 H Harmonisation, 91 HEALTH-49 questionnaire, 109, 110 Healthcare services, 118 Healthcare systems, 117 Heroin users, 107–110 Homeless People Care Network, 59 Homeless young people, 105–107 Homelessness, 50, 53, 59 Homo oeconomicus, 137 Horizontal structure, 92 Host societies, 57 Housing First model, 53, 59, 65 Human rights profession, 104 I The imaginary, 52 Imaginary statement, 57 Immigrants’ rights, 57 Imprisonment, 107 Inclusion, 3 agendas, 134, 135 concept, 144 definition, 134 and deinstitutionalisation, 139 developments, 144 excluding, 144–146 fundamental, 144–146 and participation, 135, 136 pragmatic, 144–146 processes, 134, 135

Index real utopia, 146, 147 trajectories, 134, 135 Inclusion mediation, 100 Inclusive education, Croatia achievements, 81–83 adjustments, 80 child’s development, 79 concepts, 77 cultural sensitivity, 78 curricula and assessment, 80 democratic societies, 78 educational outcomes, 79 educational reform document, 79 education system, 77 general social framework, 79 guiding principle, 79 implementation, 81 inclusive classroom environments, 80 individual qualities, 79 integration, 79 limitations, 80 mainstream education programmes, 77 mainstream social activities, 78 participation, 79 personal development, 80 principle, 80 radical change, 80 radical transformation, 80 school culture and community, 81 social and ideological environment, 81 social imperative, 78 social justice, 78 social norms, 78 state education system, 78 teaching process, 81 Inclusive reform, 123–125 Inclusive society, 117, 133, 134, 147 Croatia, 2–4 European policy, 6, 7 in Germany, 3, 4 concepts, 97 debates (see Debates) disability, 101, 102 migration, 102–104 practising (see Practising inclusion) social services, 97, 98 social systems, 99–100 intersectional analysis, 3 methodologies, 4–6 the Netherlands (see The Netherlands) participatory principles, social institutions, 4 ‘real utopia’, 4 social inclusion, 3

Index social work, 7–9 Spain, 2, 3 Individualised society, 61 INE survey, 46 Informal care, 29, 30 Institute of Research and Further Education (IFW), 142 Institutional issues, 121 Institutionalised normative framework of homophobia, 54 Institutions, 17 Instituto de Gobierno y Políticas Públicas (IGOP), 43 Instructional aids, 114 Instrumental reason, 137 Integration, 3, 97, 100–103, 135 Intensive cross-practice support, 64 Interaction systems, 99 Intercultural mediation, 60 Intercultural mediators, 60 Intercultural opening (Interkulturelle Öffnung), 119 Intercultural relations, 61 Intercultural/transcultural concepts, 119 Interdisciplinary research, 142, 143 International Association of Schools of Social Work (IASSW), 7, 8 International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW), 7, 8 International organisations, 87 Intersectionality, 103 K KDS-Kat (medical history tool), 109 KMK statistics, 111 Koblenz–Middle Rhine region, 121 KODEX (project), 120, 121 L Labour insertion, 47 Labour market, 100, 112, 133 integration, 64–65 policy, 117 regulation, 44 Labour recruitment, 116 Labour regulations de-collectivisation and re-individualisation, 138 LaTeX (a special mathematics script for the blind), 113

161 Layperson, 99 Learning communities, 33, 113 Learning difficulties, 121 Learning programmes, 81 Least restrictive environment, 102, 122, 123, 145 Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT), 51 associations, 58 movement, 58 people, 59 rights organisations, 58 support organisations, 59, 136 Life orientation, 105–107 Limited mobility, 107 Local authorities, 31, 32, 37 Local authority care, 61 Local decision-making processes, 133 Local government reforms, 91 Local governments, 97 Long-term drug use, 107 Long-term social protection goals, 91 Low student-teacher ratios, 111 Low vision, 113–115 M Mainstream education programmes, 77 Management phase model, 109 Managerial reform measures, 98 Marginalisation, 43, 46 Marginalised groups, 104 Market mechanisms, 98 Material deprivation, 46 Mediterranean social welfare regime, 54 Mental/behavioural disorders, 105 Mental disorders, 106 Migrant background, 115 Migrants administrative issues, 54 developing countries, 45 disadvantaged groups, 50 discrepancies, 57 legislation, 56 mental health issues, 54 perspectives, 50 psychosocial impacts, 50 Roma, 52 social exclusion, 54 social protection systems, 55 social workers, 51 trajectories and discussions, 51

Index

162 Migration, 102–104 challenges, 120 and education, 119, 120 issues, 61 Mitchell’s approach, 80 Monocultural society, 136 Motherhood, 24 Mothering responsibilities, 23 N Nationalist political parties, 145 National Statistics Institute, 46 Nation/ethnicity, 103 Neighbourhoods bottom-up research instruments, 29, 30, 37 care capacity, 29 Care Capacity Monitor, 28 decentralisation, 28 Dutch participation society, 30 individualised neighbourliness, 28 informal care, 29–31 local authorities, 29 physical environments, 28 residents, 31 social networks, 28, 30–32 social rule systems, 29 socioeconomic position, 30, 31 sociological perspective, 28 Neoliberalism, 87 Neoliberal societies, 137–138 The Netherlands centralised social policy, 14 changing mechanisms, 3–4 citizens’ decision-making, 9 decentralisation, 14 the do democracy decentralisation, 16 local policy, 17 Participation Act, 17 participation society, 16 political decision-making, 16 self-reliance, 17, 18 social professionals, 17 Social Support Council, 16 social work, 18–20 Trust in Democracy, 16 Youth Care Act, 17 Dutch social policy, 13 inclusive society, 1 local authorities, 14 national welfare policy, 13 participation, 3, 9

Participation Act, 14 participation society (see Dutch participation society) self-reliance, 38, 39 social domain, 14 social integration, 15, 16 social welfare developments, 13 social work, 38 SSA, 14 three Ds, 14 research team, 142 UN CRPD, 13, 14 Youth Care Act, 14 The Newcomers Integration Law 1998, 15 New poverty, 138 Niklas Luhmann’s theory, 97 Non-EU immigrants, 51 Non-expert group, 61 Non-formal educational programme, 121 Non-German citizens, 117 Non-governmental organisation, 92, 146 Non-migrant groups, 119 Non-profit organisations (NGOs), 47, 98, 135, 136, 138, 140 Non-profit sectors, 135 Non-profit social organisations, 48 Normalisation, 86, 101 O Older gay men active ageing, 62 Barcelona, 51 group discussions, 51 sexual diversity, 62 welfare and social inclusion, 54 Older LGBT people, 58 Organisational learning, 91 Organisations, 99 P Participation, 135, 136 See also The Netherlands Participation Act, 14, 20 Participation society, 3, 13, 134 Participatory research, 143 Participatory social work research, 143 Performance role, 99 Physical environments, 28 Policy developments, 140 Policymakers, 25, 29, 31, 37 Political activism, 138

Index Political controversy, 103 Political debate, 144 Political mandate, 140 Political opportunity structure, 55 Political sciences, 143 Post-Brexit society, 133 Post-industrial societies, 136 Post-migrant society background, 115 care provision issues, 118, 119 and education, 119, 120 European Union countries, 116 Federal Statistical Office, 115 FRG, 116 GDR, 116 general population, 116 KODEX, 120, 121 labour recruitment, 116 life circumstances, 116 migrant background, 115 non-EU countries, 116 non-German citizens, 117 school/vocational qualifications, 117 social work practitioners, 117, 118 socio-demographic and socio-economic characteristics, 116 Post-socialist European country, 75 Post-socialist transformation process, 9 Post-socialist transition, 91 Poverty, 6, 7, 10, 97, 98, 100, 117 Practice-based project, 5 Practising inclusion characterization, 104 education (see Education) heroin users, 107–110 homeless young people, 105–107 life orientation, 105–107 post-migrant society (see Post-migrant society) social services, 104 social work, 104 WfbM, 104 Pragmatic inclusion, 144–146 Precariousness framework, 61 Primary care sector, 60 Primary/secondary educational settings, 111 Private organisations, 2 Private sectors, 135 Productivist approach, 137 Professional care, 118 Proximity, 61 Psychiatric disease patterns, 105 Psychoanalysis, 50 Psychoanalytic model, 57

163 Psychology, 50 Psychosocial counselling, 108 Psychosocial life situations, 105 Psychosocial support, 88 Public health research, 119 Public sectors, 135 Public services, 61 Q Qualitative empirical research, 143 Qualitative interviews, 108, 121 Quantitative poverty, 100 R Ratification, 101 Real utopia, 144, 146, 147 Regular activities, 120 Rehabilitation processes, 59 Research projects, 5 Resource-oriented approaches, 136 Revalorisation, 78 Rights and Freedoms of Foreigners, 60–61 Right-wing populism, 145 Roma communities, 55, 62 Roma migrant women active religious identities, 64 advancement, 63 care services, 65 homeless peolpe, 66 images, 56 living conditions, 56 needs and inclinations, 63 organisations, 62 researches, 56, 62 social imaginary, 56 social rights, 51 social services primary care, 66 social status, 55 SSAP, 63 testimonies, 52 third sector organisations functions, 65 UAB research, 63 voices, 51 Roma perspectives, 62 Romanophobia, 56 S Salutogenesis model, 105–107 Schizophrenia, 54 School-age students, 111 School for everyone, 119

164 School policy, 111 Segregation, 101 Self-actualisation, 79 Self-advocacy groups, 145 Self-advocacy movement, 86 Self-awareness, 141 Self-determination, 87 Self-efficacy, 141 Self-help decreases, 98 Self-organised campaign groups, 140 Self-promotion, 141 Self-reflection, 141 Self-regulation, 141 Self-reliance, 17, 18, 37–39, 136, 141 Service planning, 108 Service providers, 90 Short-term funding programmes, 91 Single-person households, 98 Sinti community, 120 SOC-29 (Sense of Coherence Scale), 106 Social advocacy, 104 Social affiliation, 52, 55, 64 Social and economic cohesion, 47 Social and economic situations, 57 Social and educational activities, 58 Social budget, 98 Social care, 136, 138 Social care models, 53 Social changes, 98 Social debate, 144 Social Democratic Party, 87 Social development processes, 105 Social disaffection, 53 Social disaffiliation, 54, 55 Social district teams citizens’ autonomy, 33 decentralisations, 33 learning communities, 33 local authorities, 32, 33 Optimal Social Support for Citizens, 33 policy vs. practice autonomy, 34, 36 citizen autonomy, 35 citizens, 34, 35 client’s network, 35 informal public services, 35 location-oriented approaches, 34 non-cognitive skills, 34 poverty, 34 privacy considerations, 34 professionals, 34–36 self-reliance, 36 social professionals, 34

Index stress, 34 Wmo, 36 professionals, 33 self-reliance, 37 social professionals, 33, 38 SSA, 32 Social divisions, 52 Social domain, 14, 16, 134 Social environment, 53, 141 Social exclusion, 100 boundaries and limitations, 43 definition, 44, 100 discrimination and human rights abuse, 57 diversity, 45 factors, 43 features, 44 homelessness, 53, 59 individuals, 64 inequality, 44 integration loss, 45 migrants, 54 phenomenon, 45 poverty, 43, 44, 53 process, 44, 45 protection and assistance, 45 risk, 45 situations, 44 women, 46 Social imaginary, 57 Social inclusion, 3, 139 Catalonia, 47 challenges, 47 cohesion and social justice, 45 migrants, 55 opportunities, 46 public sector measures, 47 reconstruction, 45 social pillars, 46 social protection mechanisms, 66 structural factors, 53 Social inequalities, 2, 6, 10, 43, 51, 97 Social insurance systems, 99 Social integration, 53, 86, 113 Civic Integration Law, 2007, 15 Dutch integration policy, 15 immigration policy, 15 inclusive society, 15, 16 migration, 15 the Netherlands, 15 newcomers, 15, 16 The Newcomers Integration Law 1998, 15 Social isolation, 100 Social links, 52

Index Social marginalisation, 44 Social measures, 98 Social minorities, 135 Social model, 86 Social movements, 137 Social networks, 28 Social organisations, 50, 60 Social participation, 52, 120 collective responses, 58 homeless, 58 LGBT movement, 58 reintegration programmes, 58 structures, 58 Social policy, 2, 7, 22, 36, 117 Social policy function, 98 Social policy reforms, 85 Social problems, 99 Social professionals, 17, 18, 20, 34, 65 Social programmes, 138 Social progress, 134 Social protection system, 91 Social relationships, 100 Social rule systems, 29 Social sector expenditure, 91 Social sector organisations, 48–49 Social security protection systems, 56 Social security system, 100 Social services primary care (SSAP) accessing strategy, 63 assistance, 63 debureaucratising social care schemes, 63 NGOs, 63 public administration, 62 Roma community, 62 Roma migrant women, 63 Social stigmatisation, 52 Social Support Act (SSA), 14, 19, 32 Social Support Councils, 16 Social support systems, 3 Social system, 61, 99–100 Social welfare developments, 13 Social welfare system, 76, 91, 93, 94 Social work Care Pyramid, 19 challenges profession, 141, 142 research, 142–144 definition, 8 deinstitutionalisation, 2 Dutch, 19 duty of care, 18 factors, 8 funding, 117

165 government care provision, 20 IASSW, 7, 8 IFSW, 7, 8 inclusive societies, 7, 9 institutions and professionals, 139 interventions, 8 local authorities, 19 neoliberal policy, 18 the Netherlands, 38 pedagogy, 18 political mandate, 140 practitioners, 117, 118 principles, 8 psychosocial vulnerability, 8 public administrations, 4 social agents, 7 social change, 7 social institution, 4 social needs, 7 social policy, 9 social professionals, 18, 20 social worker, 19 SSA, 19 theories, 136 values, 18 Social work activists, 135 Social work practice, 117 Social work professionals, 22 Social work’s orientation, 94 Social workers, 14, 22–24, 26, 27, 31, 32, 37, 38, 60, 93 interventions, 61 Societal normality, 102 Society of individuals, 136 Socioeconomic/ethnic population groups, 100 Socio-educational groups, 65 Sociology, 50, 143 Solidarity, 140 Spain and City Council objectives, 53 inclusive society, 1 participation, 3 private organisations, 2 public sector, 2 social inequality, 2 Spanish citizenship, 56 Spanish social work/inclusion, target groups gay men, 62 homelessness, 62–64 migration, 60–61 Roma migrant women, 62–64 Special education, 114 Special education system, 101

Index

166 SSAP-supported group interventions, 63 Standardised instruments, 108, 109 State intervention, 134 Stereotyping, 52 Stigmatisation, 56, 57 Stratified differentiation, 99 Student-teacher ratio, 111 Substitution treatment, 110 Supportive environments, 90 Systems theory, 3 T Tactile media, 114 Target-oriented methodical action, 107 Third sector organisations Catalonian, 48 collaboration, 48 ECAS, 48 economy/society, 47 entities, 49 financing, 49 Housing First model, 65 impact, 49 importance, 47 improvement, 49 inclusive society, 48 migration-related issues, 61 research projects, 65 role, 59 social interests, 49 taula’s members, 49 Three decentralisations, 14, 33 Top-down approach, 92–93 Total institutions, 139 Training programmes, 107 Transition management framework, 90 U UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD), 13, 77, 101, 102, 134, 139

Unemployment, 107, 111 United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), 73 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 85 University of Barcelona study, 54 V Visual impairments, 113–115 Vocational integration, 120 Vulnerability, 9, 55 W Wareness-raising approach, 120 Welcoming culture, 117 Welfare infrastructure, 2 Welfare organisations, 22, 98 Welfare state, 75, 97 Welfare state transformation neoliberal societies, 137–138 Welfare structures decentralising and deinstitutionalising, 138, 139 transformation, 136 welfare state transformation, 137–138 Welfare system, 137, 144 Wide-ranging process, 80 Workshops for people with disabilities (WfbM), 104, 112 World Report on Disability, 122 X Xarxa d’acollida de les persones sense llar (XAPSLL), 50 Y Youth Care Act, 14, 17 Youth care services, 22