Cited by 38Disability Rights and RepresentationFeminism, Gender, and IntersectionalityHealthcare innovation and challenges

Women, disability, care: Good neighbours or uneasy bedfellows?

Beckett, Clare·2007·Critical Social Policy

Abstract

Disabled activists and feminist thinkers both lay claim to ownership of `care'. To the disabled people's movement, care is a necessity on the road to equal rights and citizenship. To women, care relationships are premised in capitalist economic and family relationships and can be both oppressive, and, conversely, sources of personal identity claims. The two perspectives are different, and conflict. Oppositional claims are sited in practical resource giving decisions, and state resources have implications for the individuals concerned. Resource relationships between the state and individuals affect both practical help given and the location of the resourced group to the wider society. I argue that these claims are fundamentally oppositional and result in oppression. The relationship, when mediated by provision of care, inevitably becomes disempowering. Care provision is a function of a welfare state, and care policy will effectively empower one or other group. This oppressive dyad can be altered by fundamental re-assessment of disabled theorization and feminist action, carried through into state provision and reflecting feminist perspectives of ethical care.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0261018307078847

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • La exclusión que experimentan las PcDM en el acceso a la vivienda se encuentra al servicio de la preservación de la división entre un ámbito público y uno privado, contribuyendo a la opresión de ambos grupos.

    “Más generalmente, entonces, podría afirmarse que la exclusión que experimentan las PcDM en el acceso a la vivienda se encuentra al servicio de la preservación de la división entre un ámbito público y uno privado, contribuyendo a la opresión de ambos grupos 90 .”

    From El derecho a la vivienda adecuada de las personas con discapacidad mental en Chile (2023) · cites this paper as Beckett (2007), p. 361.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Beckett, C.
Affiliations
University of Bradford (GB)
Corresponding author
Beckett, Clare
Venue
Critical Social Policy
Published
2007-08
Volume
27
Issue
3
Pages
360-380
ISSN
  • 0261-0183 (ISSN-L)
  • 1461-703X
OpenAlex
W2060306361
Cited by
38
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 5
FWCI
3.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Critical Social Policy (publishedVersion)
  • Bradford Scholars (University of Bradford) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Rights and Representation
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Feminism, Gender, and Intersectionality
  • Social Sciences › Education › Healthcare innovation and challenges
Keywords
care, disability, women, disability rights movement, feminism, care ethics, welfare state, oppression, citizenship, gender and disability, resource allocation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review