Hoffman Allison K
Yale J Health Policy Law Ethics. 2016 Summer;16(2):147-232.
U.S. law and policy on long-term care fail to address the insecurity American families face due to prolonged illness and disability-a problem that grows more serious as the population ages and rates of disability rise. This Article argues that, even worse, we have focused on only part of the problem. It illuminates two ways that prolonged disability or illness can create insecurity. The first arises from the risk of becoming disabled or sick and needing long-term care, which could be called "care-recipient" risk. The second arises out of the risk of becoming responsible for someone else's care, which I call "next-friend" risk. The law and social welfare policy has focused on the first, but this Article argues that the second equally threatens the wellbeing of American families. While attempting to mitigate care-recipient risk, in fact, the law has steadily expanded next-friend risk, by reinforcing a structure of long-term care that relies heavily on informal caregiving. Millions of informal caregivers face financial and nonmonetary harms that deeply threaten their own long-term security. These harms are disproportionately experienced by people who are already vulnerable-women, minorities, and the poor. Scholars and policymakers have catalogued and critiqued these costs but treat them as an unfortunate byproduct of an inevitable system of informal care. This Article argues that if we, instead, understand becoming responsible for the care of another as a social risk-just as we see the chance that a person will need long-term care as a risk-it could fundamentally shift the way we approach long-term care policy. In risk-theory terms, this Article proposes we reimagine the risk of long-term care.
美国关于长期护理的法律和政策未能解决美国家庭因长期疾病和残疾而面临的不安全问题——随着人口老龄化和残疾率上升,这个问题变得更加严重。本文认为,更糟糕的是,我们只关注了问题的一部分。它阐明了长期残疾或疾病可能造成不安全的两种方式。第一种源于残疾或患病并需要长期护理的风险,这可称为“受护理者”风险。第二种源于承担他人护理责任的风险,我称之为“近亲”风险。法律和社会福利政策一直关注第一种风险,但本文认为第二种风险同样威胁着美国家庭的福祉。事实上,在试图减轻受护理者风险的同时,法律通过强化严重依赖非正式护理的长期护理结构,稳步扩大了“近亲”风险。数百万非正式护理人员面临着严重威胁其自身长期安全的经济和非货币伤害。这些伤害在已经处于弱势的人群——女性、少数族裔和穷人中更为普遍。学者和政策制定者已经列举并批评了这些成本,但将它们视为不可避免的非正式护理体系的不幸副产品。本文认为,如果我们相反地将承担他人护理责任视为一种社会风险——就像我们将一个人需要长期护理的可能性视为一种风险一样——它可能会从根本上改变我们制定长期护理政策的方式。用风险理论的术语来说,本文建议我们重新构想长期护理的风险。