Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T17:12:47.928Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Introduction: Interrogating Welfare Stigma

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 March 2022

Fiona Dukelow
Affiliation:
School of Applied Social Studies, University College, Cork, Ireland. E-mail: [email protected]
Joe Whelan
Affiliation:
School of Social Work and Social Policy, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland. E-mail: [email protected]
Robert Bolton
Affiliation:
Institute for Social Science in the 21st Century, University College, Cork, Ireland. E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Themed Section on Interrogating Welfare Stigma: Dynamics of (re)Production, Experience and Resistance in the Welfare State
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022 Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baumberg, B. (2016) ‘The stigma of claiming benefits: a quantitative study’, Journal of Social Policy, 45, 2,181–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, J. (1997) The Psychic Life of Power: Essays in Subjection, Stanford, Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dukelow, F. and Kennett, P. (2018) ‘Discipline, debt and coercive commodification: post-crisis neoliberalism and the welfare state in Ireland, the UK and the USA’, Critical Social Policy, 38, 3, 482504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, N. (2022) ‘Coping with gendered welfare stigma: exploring everyday accounts of stigma and resistance strategies among mothers who claim social security benefits’, Social Policy and Society, this themed section.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farnsworth, K. and Irving, I. (2021) ‘Introduction: A hostile decade for social policy: economic crisis, political crisis and austerity 2010-20’, Social Policy and Society, 20, 1, 74–6.Google Scholar
Finn, P. (2021) ‘Navigating indifference: Irish jobseekers’ experiences of welfare conditionality’, Administration, 69, 2, 6786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goffman, E. (1990 [1963]) Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity, London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Hick, R. and Murphy, M. P. (2021) ‘Common shock, different paths? Comparing social policy responses to COVID-19 in the UK and Ireland’, Social Policy and Administration, 55, 2, 312–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, T. and Tyler, I. (2015) “Benefits broods’: the cultural and political crafting of anti-welfare commonsense’, Critical Social Policy, 35, 4, 470–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mills, C. (2018) ‘”Dead people don’t claim”: a psychopolitical autopsy of UK austerity suicides’, Critical Social Policy, 38, 2, 302–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Page, R. (2015 [1984]) Stigma, Hove: Psychology Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patrick, R. (2017) For Whose Benefit?: The Everyday Realities of Welfare Reform, Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
Pinker, R. (1970) ‘Stigma and social welfare’, Social Work, 27, 2, 13–7.Google Scholar
Scambler, G. (2019) A Sociology of Shame and Blame: Insiders versus Outsiders, Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Scott, J. (1990) Domination and the Arts of Resistance: Hidden Transcripts, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Spicker, R. (1984) Stigma and Social Welfare, London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Tyler, I. (2013) Revolting Subjects: Social Abjection and Resistance in Neoliberal Britain, London: Zed Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tyler, I. (2018) ‘Resituating Erving Goffman: from stigma power to black power’, in Tyler, I. and Slater, T. (eds.), The Sociology of Stigma, London: Sage, 2647.Google Scholar
Tyler, I. (2020) Stigma: The Machinery of Inequality, London: Zed Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whelan, J. (2021) ‘We have our dignity, yeah? Scrutiny under suspicion: experiences of welfare conditionality in the Irish social protection system’, Social Policy and Administration, 55, 1, 3450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar