Suchergebnisse

Front Cover -- Copyright -- Contents -- Acknowledgements -- Introduction -- Part I -- Chapter 1 -- Chapter 2 -- Chapter 3 -- Chapter 4 -- Part II -- Chapter 5 -- Chapter 6 -- Chapter 7 -- Part III -- Chapter 8 -- Chapter 9 -- Chapter 10 -- Part IV -- Chapter 11 -- Chapter 12 -- Chapter 13 -- References -- Contributors -- Index -- Back Cover.

Reflecting on findings from over ten years of research, four studies, and a focused two-day workshop, this article argues that it is past time to surface gender as a critical consideration in reimagining care homes to create conditions of dignity and respect for residents, workers, and families in all their diversity. Considering care homes as an indicator of equity in welfare states, we deploy a concept of gender that acknowledges the relationship between bodies and social relations, and an inclusive concept of women that interrogates the differences among women. We outline the reasons that make care homes a women's issue, explaining why women are the majority of care home residents and staff across jurisdictions in high-income countries. We draw insights from our workshop and research studies to discuss how gender is both ignored and embedded in care home design and offer considerations and possibilities for designing care homes for women in all their diversity.

Abstract
Social reproduction has received considerable recent attention from academics and activists aiming to stimulate and advance transformative political change. Yet, an understanding of social reproduction as "work" has sometimes slipped away, leaving behind important anti-racist feminist insights. Engaging with recent contributions from scholars in the U.S., U.K., and Canada, we argue that social reproduction is most useful as a concept, not as a theory, and is best understood as "work". We point out quandaries and ambiguities that have produced conceptual confusion in scholarship on social reproduction and argue for a conceptualization offered by feminist political economy. We conclude that social reproduction, when understood as work, can support efforts to build the mass movements and solidarity necessary for effective anti-capitalist politics if its relationship to, and contradictions with, the processes of dispossession and capital accumulation are taken into account.

This article makes three crucial, related arguments. First, most European analyses of immigration and social welfare fail to consider how these policies intersect to shape the social reproduction of populations, instead sticking to notions of welfare chauvinism, social citizenship, and deservingness. Second, welfare/immigration analyses are usually set at the national level, but subnational comparisons can challenge tidy welfare state regime categorizations, revealing both nuance and policy opportunities. Third, a focus on social reproduction regimes that includes welfare and immigration policies reveals how jurisdictions border the extraction of social reproductive labour, with impacts on who gets in and under which conditions, and on the distribution of paid and unpaid social reproductive work within immigrant and established families in Canada. Developing our feminist border analysis, we illustrate our approach through a comparative analysis of Quebec and Ontario to show how social reproductive borders extract care labour and from whom, under diverging policy regimes.

Drawing on recent case-study data, this article explores innovative practices around harm reduction and housing for older people who use drugs. Although right-wing groups call for further criminalisation of drug use, in light of extraordinarily high levels of deaths from opioid overdose in Vancouver, Canada, the provincial government has quietly permitted the development of safe supply, the testing of illegal drugs to avoid poisonings and the provision of low-barrier, inclusive and supportive social housing, including housing specifically for older people. Drawing on crisis theory, the article analyses the provision of low-barrier harm reduction services for this marginalised and highly vulnerable group of older people and reflects on what we can learn about providing supports that are needs based and strengths based and embody meeting people where they are.