Daly Mary
Department of Social Policy and Intervention University of Oxford Oxford UK.
Soc Policy Adm. 2020 Dec;54(7):985-998. doi: 10.1111/spol.12645. Epub 2020 Aug 28.
In the context of very high mortality and infection rates, this article examines the policy response to COVID-19 in care homes for older people in the UK, with particular focus on England in the first 10 weeks of the pandemic. The timing and content of the policy response as well as different possible explanations for what happened are considered. Undertaking a forensic analysis of policy in regard to the overall plan, monitoring and protection as well as funding and resources, the first part lays bare the slow, late and inadequate response to the risk and reality of COVID-19 in care homes as against that in the National Health Service (NHS). A two-pronged, multidimensional explanation is offered: structural, sectoral specificities; political and socio-cultural factors. Amongst the relevant structural factors are the institutionalised separation from the health system, the complex system of provision and policy for adult social care, widespread market dependence. There is also the fact that logistical difficulties were exacerbated by years of austerity and resource cutting and a weak regulatory tradition of the care home sector. The effects of a series of political and cultural factors are also highlighted. As well as little mobilisation of the sector and low public commitment to and knowledge of social care, there is a pattern of Conservative government trying to divest the state of responsibilities in social care. This would support an interpretation in terms of policy avoidance as well as a possible political calculation by government that its policies towards the care sector and care homes would be less important and politically damaging than those for the NHS.
在极高死亡率和感染率的背景下,本文审视了英国养老院针对新冠疫情的政策应对措施,尤其聚焦于疫情头10周英格兰地区的情况。文中探讨了政策应对的时机和内容,以及对所发生情况的不同可能解释。第一部分对总体计划、监测与保护以及资金和资源方面的政策进行了详尽分析,揭示出养老院针对新冠疫情的风险和现实所做出的应对迟缓、滞后且不力,与国民医疗服务体系(NHS)形成对比。本文给出了一个双管齐下的多维度解释:结构和部门特殊性;政治及社会文化因素。相关结构因素包括与医疗体系的制度化分离、成人社会护理复杂的供给和政策体系、广泛的市场依赖。此外,多年的财政紧缩和资源削减加剧了后勤困难,养老院行业监管传统薄弱,这些也是事实。一系列政治和文化因素的影响也得到了强调。除了该行业动员不足、公众对社会护理的投入和了解程度较低之外,还存在保守党政府试图推卸国家在社会护理方面责任的模式。这既支持了政策回避的解释,也可能反映出政府的一种政治算计,即其针对护理行业和养老院的政策,相较于针对国民医疗服务体系的政策,重要性更低且政治损害性更小。