Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Sources of extracts
- Introduction
- Part 1 The family, poverty and population
- Part 2 The ‘welfare state’
- Part 3 Redistribution, universality and inequality
- Part 4 Power, policy and privilege
- Part 5 International and comparative dimensions
- Part 6 The subject of social policy
- Bibliography
- Index
two - The social division of welfare: Some reflections on the search for equity
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 January 2022
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Sources of extracts
- Introduction
- Part 1 The family, poverty and population
- Part 2 The ‘welfare state’
- Part 3 Redistribution, universality and inequality
- Part 4 Power, policy and privilege
- Part 5 International and comparative dimensions
- Part 6 The subject of social policy
- Bibliography
- Index
Summary
Some students of social policy see the development of the welfare state in historical perspective as part of a broad, ascending road of social betterment provided for the working classes since the 19th century and achieving its goal in our time. This interpretation of change as a process of unilinear progression in collective benevolence for these classes led to the belief that in the year 1948 the ‘welfare state’ was established. Since then, successive governments have busied themselves with the more effective operation of the various services, with extensions here and adjustments there and all parties, in and out of office, have claimed the maintenance of the welfare state as an article of faith.
On this view it could be supposed that, speaking generally, Britain is approaching the end of the road of social reform; the road down which Eleanor Rathbone and other reformers and rebels laboured with vision and effect. This would seem to be the principal implication of much public comment on the social services and one which has received endorsement in policy statements of the Conservative and Labour parties. Some of the more important writings on the subject since 1948, far from suggesting that social needs have been neglected, argue that the welfare state was ‘established’ too quickly and on too broad a scale. The consequences, it was argued, have been harmful to the economic health of the nation and its ‘moral fibre’.
Against this background, compounded of uneasiness and complacency, criticism has mainly focused on the supposedly egalitarian aims or effects of the social services. It is said that the relief of poverty or the maintenance of a national minimum as an objective of social policy should not mean the pursuit of equality; “a fascinating and modern development” for the social services according to Hagenbuch (1953, p 5). The Beveridge ‘revolution’ did not, it is argued, imply an egalitarian approach to the solution of social problems. The error of welfare state policies since 1948 has been, according to this diagnosis, to confuse ends and means and to pursue egalitarian aims with the result that the ‘burden’ of redistribution from rich to poor has been pushed too far and is now excessive.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Welfare and WellbeingRichard Titmuss' Contribution to Social Policy, pp. 59 - 70Publisher: Bristol University PressPrint publication year: 2001
- 2
- Cited by